"Quinton McCombs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>In this method, the value of user.getName() is checked. If it is empty,
>the user is anonymous. However, getName() is implemented in
>SecurityObject. I can't find where setName() is ever called.
Many places. Basically this checks, whether a passed user object is
either null or contains an empty name. This is the definition of an
anonymous user.
Personally, I'd have liked to have an explicit class, e.g.
org.apache.turbine.util.security.AnonymousUser implements User
to be used as the anonymous user object no matter what security
service is used and then test for this object here, but this seemed to
be a too big change.
>I thought about overriding getName() and setName() in TurbineUser as
>that would fix the problem. Would this cause any problems?
Ah, I see your problem. The old security service has just getUsername
and setUsername. Yes, they should be mapped to setName and getName and
the getUsername and setUsername deprecated.
Didn't think about this, sorry.
Regards
Henning
--
Dipl.-Inf. (Univ.) Henning P. Schmiedehausen INTERMETA GmbH
[EMAIL PROTECTED] +49 9131 50 654 0 http://www.intermeta.de/
Java, perl, Solaris, Linux, xSP Consulting, Web Services
freelance consultant -- Jakarta Turbine Development -- hero for hire
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
