The naming is not as import, but I think we should just keep it the same as it has been, sfGuardPlugin.
sfGuardPlugin - This plugin would be configurable to work with Doctrine/Propel right out of the box, and would have configuration options to integrate with the 2 plugins below. sfGuardRegisterPlugin(requires sfGuardPlugin) sfGuardForgotPasswordPlugin(requires sfGuardPlugin) - Jon Matthias Nothhaft wrote: > Jonathan H. Wage wrote: > >> I don't think it needs to be a different plugin for each driver for >> sfGuardPlugin, the calls in the actions to the database would be to an >> extracted class, that would call the appropriate methods for >> doctrine/propel depending on how sfGuardPlugin is configured. >> > > Do you mean Propel and Doctrine in one single plugin? > > I think this is the best approach as it will otherwise lead to a pretty > big number of plugins! > > > >> I agree we'd then be able to create the following: sfGuardRegisterPlugin >> and sfGuardForgotPasswordPlugin. >> > > as these plugins require the sfGuardPlugin!? hm.. I think we should > rename that to sfUserPlugin as this would better fit to "generic user > functions".. then we have sfUserRegistrationPlugin, sfUser...Plugin > > What do you think? > > Regards, > Matthias > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "symfony users" 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/symfony-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
