Shibboleth Developers

[Tom Zeller <>]

Allright, thanks for the guidance. I was kind of surprised to see
manual loading of "depends-on" as well, since I thought that was a
spring built-in, but I'm not well versed.

On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 3:19 PM, Chad La Joie 
<>
 wrote:
> Ah, I see what you mean.  For now I'd recommend just pulling the line of
> code:
>
> builder.addDependsOn("shibboleth.LogbackLogging");
>
> and I'll look in to whether there is a different way to ensure that the
> logging service is started before the other beans.
>
> On 6/2/10 4:05 PM, Tom Zeller wrote:
>>
>> Without a "shibboleth.LogbackLogging" bean, an exception is thrown
>> when loading the resolver :
>>
>>  org.springframework.beans.factory.NoSuchBeanDefinitionException: No
>> bean named 'shibboleth.LogbackLogging' is defined
>>
>> To workaround, I declared
>>
>>  <bean id="shibboleth.LogbackLogging"
>> class="edu.internet2.middleware.ldappc.spml.EmptyBean" />
>>
>> where EmptyBean is truly empty:
>>
>> public class EmptyBean { }
>>
>> and AbstractServiceBeanDefinitionParser is :
>>
>> public abstract class AbstractServiceBeanDefinitionParser ...
>>  protected void doParse(...
>>
>>   builder.addDependsOn("shibboleth.LogbackLogging");
>>   for (String dependency : XMLHelper
>>      .getAttributeValueAsList(configElement.getAttributeNodeNS(null,
>> "depends-on"))) {
>>       builder.addDependsOn(dependency);
>>    }
>>
>> Could an optional dependency on shibboleth.LogbackLogging be done in
>> xml via depends-on, or is that unordered ? or a hassle ?
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 2, 2010 at 2:44 PM, Chad La 
>> Joie<>
>>   wrote:
>>>
>>> I don't believe there is any hard dependency on the logging service. It's
>>> only there to ensure that in Shib the logging service is started before
>>> the
>>> other beans.
>>>
>>> On 6/2/10 3:40 PM, Tom Zeller wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In shib-common 1.2.0, it looks like
>>>> AbstractServiceBeanDefinitionParser now depends on the
>>>> "shibboleth.LogbackLogging" bean. I'm reusing shib-common but not
>>>> logback logging. Could that dependency be optional instead ? If not, I
>>>> guess I can declare such a bean.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Tom
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Chad La Joie
>>> http://itumi.biz
>>> trusted identities, delivered
>>>
>>
>
> --
> Chad La Joie
> http://itumi.biz
> trusted identities, delivered
>