Jason van Zyl wrote: >On 12/11/01 8:58 AM, "Paul Spencer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>I agree with the general idea of completing 1.3 and starting a 2.0 based >>on a new API. >> > >Possibly based on Turbine 3.x? :-) > I agree, provided that a stable turbine release is scheduled. We have had to deal with a lot of problems because of APIs moving around. We have chosen to follow a more stable path as the code base grows, and as people starts using it for production systems we need a clean evolution path.
BTW, I was discussing with a colleague here and he said that he found disgusting the mixture in Turbine API between two separate issues in the same service: - Authentication - User Management (The User data) After a little thought and talk, we agreed. In a lot of cases, authentication can be handled by quite separate mechanisms, for instance a corporate LDAP or JAAS. While in some projects we *must* use these resources, we *cannot* have write access to the corporate repositories, thus we need to store User Info in separate places from the one provided by the default TurbineSecurity. Which implies we need to fiddle with Turbine architecture. Do you know how is it evolving in Turbine 3.0? Are there generic Persistence Services, that we could use for both PSML and User Data? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
