Best way to use existing beans in combined flow

[Daniel Lutz]

On 8-25-15, 3:27 PM, Cantor, Scott wrote:
> Note that David Langenberg was successfully able to invoke the Password
> subflow directly from within a second flow without much hassle, so it may
> be that you can do that to combine the flows, depending on the UI.

In case of the combined flow, our goal is to show a single page to the user
where the user can choose between username/password login and login by
using SPNEGO/Kerberos, without getting any intermediate page.
(We identified this as the best solution to get the best usability.)
In this case, I think it doesn't make sense for us calling the Password subflow.
But still, I will contact David Langenberg for details. Thank you for the hint.

(BTW, there will also be a standalone login flow for SPNEGO/Kerberos only.
In this case, there shouldn't be any dependency on the authn/Password
login flow.)

>> This worked so far. But I'm not sure whether this is the right way to
>> do it.
> 
> In the general case, no, because all of that is implementation detail
> and is not part of the API. So if this were expected to be a third
> party extension long term, that would definitely be bad, we'd potentially
> break it on any update, even just a patch.

OK, this makes sense for me for a third party extension.

> But since the plan is to incorporate this into the IdP,
> that's not really a problem, we can share our own implementation
> classes freely. So only because of that, I would say it's fine for now.

Indeed, we like to get our implementation incorporated into the IdP.

Daniel