I'm a strong believer in keeping libraries together. I would say if there's any way to upgrade the user/login engines to provide more/less/better functionality it would be much better than forking. There are already 16 different login plugins and engines, we really don't need another (and it sets yourself up for failure since nobody will be able to find it in the mess of code).
I'm excited though to see more development on the engine! Love, Chuck Vose On 8/17/06, James Adam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Jay, > > It's worth noting that the login and user engines tackle different > issues. The login engine provides the login/password authentication, > whereas the user engine (in its current form), only provides an RBAC > layer on top of that. > > But anyway... the login engine is simply a port of the Salted Hash > Login Generator, and it suffers from many of the issues which that > generator had. Please do go ahead developing a streamlined version, > and if you feel it's suitable for other people to use, that's good too > :) > > - james > > On 8/17/06, Jay Levitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > LoginEngine, as the first released engine, tries to bite off a lot - > > authentication, a little authorization, user management. > > > > These days, there are better choices for authorization - UserEngine, Bill > > Katz's plugin, acl_system, etc - and, realistically, most sites will end up > > overriding nearly all the UserController stuff as they build their user > > model. > > > > I'd like to take a crack at a stripped-down LoginEngine that ONLY tackles > > authentication (and its related functions, like e-mail verification), and > > doesn't try to do the rest. For instance, I think changeable_fields is > > simultaneously too much (a default authentication engine shouldn't have > > firstname/lastname) and too little (you'll end up creating your own model > > sooner or later). The UserController is really a scaffold, and should be > > easier to override in small pieces. In general, I feel LoginEngine wants > > to be more modular and orthogonal - and I'm not yet sure exactly what I > > mean by that. > > > > My question: do others feel the same way about LoginEngine, in which case > > I'll submit patches, or should this be a new engine that forks LoginEngine? > > > > Jay > > > > _______________________________________________ > > engine-developers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-developers-rails-engines.org > > > > > -- > * J * > ~ > _______________________________________________ > engine-developers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-developers-rails-engines.org > _______________________________________________ engine-developers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.rails-engines.org/listinfo.cgi/engine-developers-rails-engines.org
