What is the benefit? Or maybe what I mean to ask, is it a big problem to leave it in 2.3? Does it adversely affect something?
It seems the majority opinion is to dump it, but there are a few who have expressed that this will cause them problems in the short term. Since we dont really know what these people have on their plates, I find it callous to assume they can extend TurbineUser simply because some feel it is now terribly easy. If this is somehow going to hold up development, then it should be dumped. But if we can simply leave it for now, then what is the harm? On Fri, 2003-03-21 at 06:34, Scott Eade wrote: > I don't think any of the comments so far make a strong enough argument to > retain these. > > Yes, extending TurbineUser has been a difficult to date, but it has been > fairly well documented and achieved successfully by quite a number of > people. In 2.3 extending TurbineUser is going to be really easy - easier I > think than the complications involved in supporting and using OBJECT_DATA > and persistent pull tools. > > I vote we toss them. > > Scott > -- > Scott Eade > Backstage Technologies Pty. Ltd. > http://www.backstagetech.com.au > .Mac Chat/AIM: seade at mac dot com > > > On 21/03/2003 3:19 PM, "Quinton McCombs" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The use of perm scope pull tools and storing data in the TurbineUser > > using the setPerm() method would be affected by this change. > > > > Both of these cause data to be serialized into the OBJECT_DATA column in > > the TURBINE_USER database table. Since Torque (actually Village) has > > issues using the BLOB datatype, there is an upper limit to the amount of > > data that can be stored in this manner. Everything will work fine until > > you hit this limit then you will start getting database errors. > > > > The downsides to using setPerm() in TurbineUser are discussed in the > > extending turbine user how to. To summarize, this data can not be used > > to select from the database and is very difficult to extact using a > > third party tool that accessed the database directly. > > > > It is a very simple process to start storing this data in database > > columns using the DBSecurityService. It is even easier if you use the > > new TorqueSecurityService that Henning wrote which is availiable in 2.3. > > > > If you truly have a need for perm scope tools, you can get the same > > functionality using the new authorized scope tool in 2.3. Just like the > > perm scope tool, the authorized tool is initialized with an instance of > > the user object. During the initialization of the tool, you can get any > > data that you need to maintain state across logins from the user object. > > Just add any data that you previously stored in the perm tool to the > > user object using database columns to store your data. > > > > I am proposing that the use of the OBJECT_DATA column be deprecated in > > 2.3. Is there anyone that this will cause a problem for? > > > > -------------------------------------------- > > Quinton McCombs > > NequalsOne - HealthCare marketing tools > > mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > http://www.NequalsOne.com > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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]
