Chris Withers wrote:
> Right now, I'd like to see the scope kept _tight_, just dealing with
> authentication, no user metadata, that can wait for later. There is XUF, but I'm
> not sure about the code quality and I think it tries to do too much.
>
> Of course, I could be wrong...
Speaking as so
"Johan Carlsson [Torped]" wrote:
>
> Or what I really want to know, is it safe to base my applications on ZP
> and/or LM or is it
> something I'm going to regret?
You should be regretting it already ;-)
LoginManager needs a replacement. I'd like to see a flexible and documented user
and userfol
Sorry to post here.
I posted last week on the zope list about what appears to be a new/strange security
related problem in 2.4.3
I thought it was a problem in LdapUserFolder, but jens spent more time debugging than
I did and he feels it's somewhere in the Zope security machinery.
http://colle
On Fri, 2 Nov 2001, Stephan Richter wrote:
>
> >We would like something in "Work" that says if the authenticated user is
> >staff they get the local role "Staff" The user would be defined in the
> >User Folder in the root.
>
> I think the problem is rather trivial. Since you wrote your own user f
We have a custom UserFolder that authenticates users agains a PH
directory. This means that we have the same 30,000 or so users defined in
all of our user folder instances.
Seeing no reason to redefine users in multiple user folders we made a
decission to place one user folder in the root of our
