Hi Kieran,

On 25/04/2012, at 16:12, Kieran Kelleher wrote:

> Have a Principal class in the "pluggable framework" that looks for a 
> (runtime) properties that define a relationship destination (1) entity name, 
> (2) primary key attribute and (3) relationship name and then dynamically 
> create the relationship at startup time.
> 
> I have an example framework that demonstrates this, 
> ERRoleBasedAccessControl*, that I created a while back but have not had time 
> to fully integrate it into a production app yet. I can send it to you if you 
> are interested in this approach.
> 

Any chance to add it to GitHub?

Cheers,

Henrique

> 
> * ER prefix  = was thinking of eventually committing to Wonder if it turned 
> out to be useful enough and after production usage for a while.
> 
> On Apr 25, 2012, at 2:27 PM, Ramsey Gurley wrote:
> 
>> I'm just wondering what others are doing...
>> 
>> I'd like to create frameworks that are independent and snap together with 
>> the least amount of work. 
>> 
>> A contrived example: Say I want a user framework, an address book framework, 
>> and a calendar framework.  Each framework provides functionality 
>> independently. If I start an app with just the address book, then I can add 
>> and remove entries in one master address book. If I start an app with just 
>> the user framework, I can add/remove/login users. But if I use both, now I 
>> want to have one address book per user.
>> 
>> I don't just want to create a relationship from address book to user, 
>> because that ties the two frameworks together. I'd like the address book 
>> framework to work with or without users.  I don't want to create a 
>> relationship from the user to the address book either, for the same reason.  
>> Maybe I want to build an app later that needs users, but not address books.
>> 
>> It seems the traditional way is to build all the frameworks, then build the 
>> glue code into an AppBusinessLogic framework.  In that framework, I would 
>> create some kind of join table like UserAddressBook.  That way I keep the 
>> dependencies separate from the frameworks... but then maintaining all the 
>> glue code becomes a tedious chore.  If I make two or three apps with address 
>> books and users, I'm duplicating this "BusinessLogic" framework logic to the 
>> point where it becomes a lot of work and parallel code bases.
>> 
>> I looked at ERXPartials. That looks brilliant, but it has a big 
>> *experimental* stamp on it and I've never heard of anyone using it, so I'm 
>> wary.
>> 
>> Another approach is to implement a lot of this glue logic in the frameworks, 
>> but enable/disable things in properties or the framework's finish 
>> initialization.  This reduces the redundancy of creating glue frameworks. 
>> This has it's own pitfalls. I have to wire up relationships at startup based 
>> on whether or not some property is set. I also get none of the convenience 
>> that comes with the eogen stuff and ERXKeys for those relationships.
>> 
>> Any approaches that I've overlooked?
>> 
>> Ramsey
>> _______________________________________________
>> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
>> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
>> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/kelleherk%40gmail.com
>> 
>> This email sent to [email protected]
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
> https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/hprange%40gmail.com
> 
> This email sent to [email protected]


 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list      ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com

This email sent to [email protected]

Reply via email to