Hello,

On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Gustavo Narea
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> You can add multiple middlewares. The problem is when middlewares or
>> plugins conflict with each other (e.g. because of lack of options).
>> repoze.who does not help to solve this problem.
>
> Can you please provide one example in which that problem is present in
> repoze.who? Just one.
E.g. similar patches or similarly named cookies while they should be
different. I have accidentally named my AuthKit cookie and beaker
session the same name once and have had time until I have understood
where is problem. I have not checked that but I doubt that there is
any mechanism preventing user from doing such simple mistakes in
repoze.who. Or am I wrong?

> In all honesty, I don't like that approach of loading middleware just to add
> authentication methods.
And instead you do the *same* just in slightly different way.
repoze.who specifies in config which plugins to load. AuthKit
specifies in config which middlewares to load. I offer to specify in
code which middlewares to load. Technically I can write AuthKit-like
middleware that allows to do the same as AuthKit (but I don't see
value in that). As I have already written repoze.who adds another
level of complication (components) to WSGI.

> repoze.who's approach is elegant because it has broken
> up the various components involved in authentication (the so-called
> identifiers, authenticators, challengers and metadata providers) so that they
> can all work _harmoniously_, controlled by repoze.who itself. That's why
> repoze.who scales up and scales down.
It looks like you are the person who understands something here. Could
you explain to me why this division into components is good? Why is it
not enough WSGI for this task?

-- 
Dalius
http://blog.sandbox.lt

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"pylons-discuss" 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/pylons-discuss?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to