Craig Berry wrote:
Good to hear from you Craig!
> Unfortunately, the current user authentication scheme puts the
> validateUser(user, pwd) method in UserFactory, and builds in the assumption
> that the password is retrieved and
> compared. If this were replaced with a User.validate() method taking no
> arguments,
> derived, specialized user classes could handle their own validation in any
> desired way
> without requiring changes to the Turbine base code. This would seem to be a
> better
> compartmentalization of design.
I agree.
> Any comments? If this makes sense, is anyone with more experience than I
> interested
> in taking it on, or should I give it a shot myself? (I have essentially
> zero open-
> source dev experience, so I'm a bit wary about trying to do this.)
It would be great if you made changes to User/UserFactory and to the current
TurbineUser implementation to take advantage of the new validation scheme.
Create diffs against the cvs version (use cvs diff -u) and post them to
the list. We'll discuss them, and if agreement is reached, I'll check them
in for you. Sounds good?
Rafal
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
