Hi there, Am 11.07.12 15:34, schrieb Richard Wackerbarth: > On Jul 11, 2012, at 8:14 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote: >> Richard Wackerbarth writes: >> >>> What I am advocating is that the "core" message handler NOT be the >>> keeper of ONLY PART of it. >> >> What I'm advocating (mildly, because somebody else is going to have to >> do the work) is that the core be the keeper of ALL of it. The core is >> not just a "message handler". It is also a database, containing both >> list information and subscriber information.
If we're only talking authentication data, I agree. But I also agree with Terri that there might be a good amount of user data used by Postorius, Hyperkitty or any other web ui/client that just doesn't have anything to do with mailman's core tasks. And I don't see why something like "preferred ui theme" or profile-related stuff like "irc nick" should be stored in the core db. Isn't it very common that applications combine information from different sources (databases, webservices,...) in one place (with or without caching them locally)? I don't see anything unusual in the concept of having some mailman-related user data managed by the mailman core and other kinds of data handled by the database/file-structure/key-value-store/web-service(s) that a web application is using. If Postorius and HyperKitty decide to share some information in one place, because the projects are so closely related, that's of course a fine idea. But I wouldn't try to cram everything into the core db just for the sake of having it all in one place. Florian > > OK, so we agree that ALL of the information SHOULD be stored in one place. > That means that this database will need a lot more information, such as > access control specifications, etc. > Further, it needs to be extensible so that various users can add whatever > customizations and extensions they need. > > And each of those functions will need supporting views, etc. > > Pretty soon, you will find that what you need approaches something that > already exists -- a relational database. > Rather than "reinventing the wheel", we should just use an already existing > database system and make all of the data directly accessible. > >> Since a minimum of subscriber information is absolutely essential to the >> core job, all of >> it may as well be in there. > > This does not follow logically. Since only a minimum of information is > essential to the core job, it may well be more appropriate for it to get that > information from another source as needed. > >> In some configurations we will want the subscribers to be authenticated, so >> we may as well keep all such >> information in the core's database. >> >> Steve > > Applying your previous argument, I could equally say "since the web user > needs to be authenticated, we may as well keep all such information in the > webUI's database" > > Richard > _______________________________________________ > Mailman-Developers mailing list > Mailman-Developers@python.org > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers > Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 > Searchable Archives: > http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ > Unsubscribe: > http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/f%40state-of-mind.de > > Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9 > _______________________________________________ Mailman-Developers mailing list Mailman-Developers@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/mailman-developers Mailman FAQ: http://wiki.list.org/x/AgA3 Searchable Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/mailman-developers%40python.org/ Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/mailman-developers/archive%40jab.org Security Policy: http://wiki.list.org/x/QIA9