On Tue, Oct 20, 2009 at 16:18, Russell Keith-Magee <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Hanne Moa <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> It doesn't look like Contrib-06, covering ticket #3011, Allow for >> extendable user module, will be in for 1.2. This is >> my pony for *2.0*: > > I completely agree that we need to do something about #3011. /../ > However, the time has really past for big ticket discussions for v1.2, > and it certainly isn't the time to talk about ponies for v2.0.
Saying it's for 2.0 makes it possible to ignore backwards compatibility... > I don't want to dampen your enthusiasm here /../ I just want to point out that > now isn't the best time to start an abstract discussion about big > changes. I had to post the idea now in order to not forget it, though. It's been simmering for months. This way it's just a google-search away. > One of the big problems that needs to be solved that you haven't > addressed is the migration path. Obviously, we can't just replace the > current auth.User model - we need to have a migration plan for all > existing users of contrib.auth. auth.User as an "auth-profile" on the MinimalUser, then it could start out looking exactly as today except having its primary key be a foreign key. Then we could make some of the other fields on auth.User fetch its data from minimalUser. The tricky part IMO is getting 3rd parties to use the MinimalUser so I foresee the big job as to rewrite tons of examples, tutorials, howtos. Pushing it, basically. Oh and there should be screencasts, I love those. > I have some ideas on how this could be done, but I'd be interested > in hearing what others come up with. There are also complications > with integrating with admin that need to be worked through. Sometimes it seems babying the admin is keeping us from doing a lot of cool stuff. I couldn't use the admin at all in my very first django project (legacy database + cranky DBA), so I guess I never grew used to having it available. > So, if you want to play around with ideas in this space, I encourage > you to do so. Having a working implementation of an alternative auth > module would be a good starting point for discussions when we make the > call for proposals for v1.3. NP, I'll make a branch to play with, have been looking for a good excuse to learn git or mercurial better anyway :) > If you need feedback on a design issue you confront, django-developers > is still the right place to ask. However, I want to moderate your > expectations regarding the level of intense design discussion that the > core will be able to engage in while simultaneously working on v1.2. What, you mean "no feedback whatsoever" is *not* the normal state of affairs in all things in life? =) HM --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
