On 7/4/07, Mike Orr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Ian Bicking <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Chris AtLee wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > Is there any kind of effort underway to develop a suite of common web
> > > applications in Pylons?  I was just thinking it would be great to have
> > > options for commonly used PHP apps out there, like a forum, wiki, blog
> > > and photo gallery.
> >
> > For lower-level stuff, you might want to check out microapps:
> > http://microapps.org/
> >
> > Ideally those apps would be available with Paste Deploy, then whether
> > they are implemented in Pylons or not isn't too big of a deal.  But most
> > of the ones that have been implemented aren't yet.
>
> Interesting site.  And putting the authentication in a higher-level
> middleware should just work.  But there are a couple potential
> problems:

If you're going to be setting up more than one application initially
then you would probably be putting the authentication in some
containing middleware.  But if you're just setting up a single
application, what happens then?  I've run into this with software like
phpbb - the first thing installed on the site is phpbb which does its
own authentication / authorization.  People use the forum for a while,
and you build up a base of users in phpbb's database.  Then you want
to add a wiki, or a gallery, or something else that would benefit from
using the same users table...now what?  Do you change the wiki /
gallery to use phpbb's database?  Do you split out the authentication
information into a new database and modify phpbb?

For Pylons applications it needs to be simple to install and set up a
single application.  It should set up any authentication mechanisms
that it needs, but those mechanisms should be flexible enough so that
future applications can use it.

Sorry for the rant, I just deal with this kind of stuff all the time
at work that uses a big jumble of php applications each with their own
idea about how to authenticate users.

> 1) I saw one app written in TurboGears.  I'm not too excited about
> installing the entire TG suite just for one app, but OK.  But what if
> this app depends on a different version of TG than another microapp
> I'm using?

Couldn't this be handled by setuptools?  How self-contained is TG?

> 2) Logging.  If you just want an Apache-style log, this can be done in
> middleware.  But if you're also logging application-specific things,
> it has to be in the main app because I'm not sure if the Pylons
> request and stuff is available to middleware.  Either that or the main
> app has to put stuff in the WSGI environ for the middleware to read on
> the way out, and I'm not sure if that's an abuse of WSGI.

I would just put a logging.Logger object in the WSGI environment and
let the apps write to it..but that may be a worse abuse of WSGI :P

Cheers,
Chris

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to pylons-discuss@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to