The version we are using is from the end of March, so we could get a
buildable version of Turbine that worked with Jetspeed without too much
modification.
Just noticed that Group is now an interface, but GroupPeer still isn't. Do
you plan to morph all of the security objects into interfaces to support
LDAP and DB?
Regards,
Jay Turpin
Intel Corporation
-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2001 6:23 PM
To: turbine-dev
Subject: Re: Plans for TurbineGroup, TurbineRole, etc.
on 5/8/01 3:19 PM, "Turpin, Jay" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> All,
>
> What are the plans for implementing the siblings of TurbineUser? We have
> moved ahead and begun implementing the new code generated by Torque for
all
> of the Turbine tables and am wondering if I should begin creating new
> classes to mirror the User code. For instance, to implement the Group
table,
> we would need to create the following interfaces:
> * Group
> * GroupPeer
> * GroupManager
>
> Create the following class: DBGroupManager
>
> and modify BaseSecurityService and SecurityService to dish up the Group
> service code dynamically from the entries in the TR.p file.
>
> Is this the proper approach that is being planned? Have interfaces for
these
> files been mapped out yet? If not, we'll just dive in.
>
> Regards,
> Jay Turpin
> Intel Corp
Huh? Group is already an interface. Are you using latest CVS of Turbine?
-jon
--
If you come from a Perl or PHP background, JSP is a way to take
your pain to new levels. --Anonymous
<http://jakarta.apache.org/velocity/ymtd/ymtd.html>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
