| Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@736880 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@718858 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
merge
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@718812 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
bumping up to 2.0-SNAPSHOT as per the recent vote for 2.0
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@718223 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@710080 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
context and change various tests to take account of this assuming that the security information is now passed in the header. This pass the security context is not consolidated into a single subject. The tests that used to pass just a principal still do. Also add a delivery mode JMS policy test. Add some ignores.
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@698457 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
reliability intents. No policies or implementation changes to support these reliability intents here.
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@695928 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|
|
authentication schema across binding.ws and binding.jm. No authentication is actually performed here. That is left for users to provide their own policy interceptors. However tokens are passed and security Subjects/Principals are created. This exercise has highlighted some awkwardness in the process of building policy implementations. I'll post about this on the mail list.
git-svn-id: http://svn.us.apache.org/repos/asf/tuscany@695374 13f79535-47bb-0310-9956-ffa450edef68
|