Hi there Nikhil,
Are you using 2.1 or 2.2, they have differnt user implementations. If you're
using 2.1 look at the turbine howtos under extending user. This will work
for users that will nog have foreign key connections to other tables. I
struggled to get foreignkeys working under 2.1 but gave up after a couple of
weeks of trying. I switched to 2.2 and implemented the following:
Turbine_USER (Removed all unnecessary fields like firstname,
lastname email addres)
| (To get a plain username, password +
lastlogin etc...)
|
|
MyApp_USER (Alias of Turbine_USER, no extra fields)
|
|
MyApp_Member (Member_ID has 1:1 relationship to MyApp_USER)
(This contains all my extra fields like
firstname, postalcode etc...)
(Including Foreignkeys to other tables)
This way i have a separate user and a member, whereby every member has an
entry in the usertables. Making the 1:! relation ship a 1:n would make it
possible for a member to have several username/password. For example an
Administrator at your site might have 1 entry for member (as a physical
person) and use serveral login_names.
This works perfectly for me. I have copied the old flux java classes and
adapted the to generate a new member including his/her user_name/password in
the security system. You will have to change onlu the useractions in flux to
make this work.
Hope this helps you,
Diederik
-----Original Message-----
From: Nikhil G. Daddikar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 7:09 AM
To: Turbine Users List
Subject: Own implementation of User, but want to use TurbineSecurity
Folks,
I need to have my own implementation of User. I looked at the source
code and found that the security service is already decoupled from the
User system, so all that needs to be done is to implement User and
UserManager.
However there is one more thing. We don't use Torque and hence no
Base/Peer combos for User. However Security says (according to
configuration file and documentation) that I have to implement the
UserPeer (in om.security.peer) interface. But I looked at the source
code and UserPeer is not used at all.
Am I missing something here?
Is it possible to use Security Service if my user implementation
doesn't use torque?
Also any real life experiences in this will be greatly appreciated.
Thanks much!
-ngd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
