on 1/19/01 11:38 AM, "Diethelm Guallar, Gonzalo"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One of the projects we are working on requires a
> pretty unique structure for managing users (users,
> departments, sections, companies, blah). We will
> probably create the appropriate DB schema to manage
> all this, but in the end, from a profile point of
> view, it all reduces to whether a user can or cannot
> execute a given task.
>
> My question is: how "plugable" is the user implementation?
> If I have different needs (such as what I outlined
> above), can I create a different "implementation" and
> keep Turbine's "interface" for user management? How
> would this be done? [I use quotes because I'm not
> sure whether there really are any Java interfaces in
> this code...] Would this have any impact in the session
> management provided by Turbine? [Hopefully not...]
This can all be managed with Turbines Users/Roles/Permissions/Groups scheme.
I can't see any reason why that wouldn't be adequate for what you are
talking about.
Regardless, all of the User stuff is defined in interfaces at this point,
therefore you can provide your own implementations if you really do feel
that Turbine's won't do what you want.
-jon
--
Honk if you love peace and quiet.
------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Search: <http://www.mail-archive.com/turbine%40list.working-dogs.com/>
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
