[Acegisecurity-developer] Re: Re: User private members
That is the best answer. Thanks. "Ben Alex" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Randy Thornton wrote: > > >I am using hibernate to save my user objects. It needs public getters and > >setters and also a default constructor. Obviously I have worked around all > >this, but it would be much nicer to subclass. > > > >Thanks > > > > > > > Hi Ryan > > Ah, Hibernate. > > To date I've had classes relying on User expect its properties be > non-null. I've enforced this via the User constructor and treating it as > a value object once created (ie no mutators). With the added use of User > in events and to expose additional properties unrelated to security, I > think it makes more sense to make User an interface and put the onus on > the developer to enforce non-nulls in their implementations. This gives > developers flexibility, particularly as the Acegi Security requirements > of User are very low (four non-null property getters). > > If nobody has any concerns or objections, I'll make this change later > today. I'll leave User as the concrete implementation so nobody's > existing code breaks, whilst creating a UserDetails interface. > > Best regards > Ben > > > > --- > This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. > Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - > digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, > unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ Acegisecurity-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acegisecurity-developer
Re: [Acegisecurity-developer] Re: Re: User private members
Randy Thornton wrote: That is the best answer. Thanks. If nobody has any concerns or objections, I'll make this change later today. I'll leave User as the concrete implementation so nobody's existing code breaks, whilst creating a UserDetails interface. Just checked it the refactoring of User to UserDetails. Unit tests and container integration tests pass. Please, would people in a position to please check their code against CVS HEAD. This is the second major area of changes since 0.51. I would like to ensure both the changes work and the upgrade-05-06.txt file is accurate. Luke/Carlos, what is the condition of the current Maven build file? Does it meet the standard for upload to iBiblio? Best regards Ben --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ Acegisecurity-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acegisecurity-developer
Re: [Acegisecurity-developer] Re: Re: User private members
Ben, It works very fine for me. After changing the signature of loadUserByUsername() as explained in the upgrade-05-06.txt file, all tests of my application passed. Thanks, Karel > Please, would people in a position to please check their code against > CVS HEAD. This is the second major area of changes since 0.51. I would > like to ensure both the changes work and the upgrade-05-06.txt file is > accurate. > > Luke/Carlos, what is the condition of the current Maven build file? Does > it meet the standard for upload to iBiblio? > > Best regards > Ben --- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com ___ Acegisecurity-developer mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/acegisecurity-developer
