You are probably right -- but "SimpleUserFolder" is really "simple" (which sometimes is good).
Simpler is ALWAYS good, as the name of my company kinda gives away ;-) Nothing should ever be less simple than is absolutely necessary!
Had *you* used all these reusable components to provide the functionality in SUF, standard users could have used then out of the box -- with just sumitting a configuration page. As it is now, they have to think about (e.g.) cache management and invalidation.
All the components I've mentioned so far have been standard Zope components. If their documentation isn't so good, that's a seperate problem. If I provide work-a-likes, then I have to be responsible for that documentation too, which isn't great ;-) That said, maybe I should provide more examples of how to get things like caching and cookie auth working with SUF?
I would like to stress that I do not think SUF were bad. I just defend my statement that "exUserFolder" is something like a big brother to SUF.
A bloated fat cousin maybe ;-)
cheers,
Chris
--
Simplistix - Content Management, Zope & Python Consulting
- http://www.simplistix.co.uk_______________________________________________
Zope maillist - Zope@zope.org
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
