Hi Nigel,
On 4/30/09 2:45 AM, Nigel Sim wrote:
>
> Thats fine, and seems to work in terms of the __acl__ array, but in the
> examples on the bfgdocs site groups have a prefix, ie:
>
> (Allow, 'group:editors', 'edit'),
>
>
> So my questions are:
> 1) is the "group:" prefix defined somewhere, or is
Hi,
I'm trying to clarify how to implement groups within the BFG auth framework.
I am using repoze.who for auth, but I was unable to find a "group" provider
for it. But looking at the RepozeWhoIdentityACLSecurityPolicy class it
appeared that I could just implement a repoze.who metadata provider wh
On 4/29/09 4:32 PM, Ian Bicking wrote:
> Some questions that come to mind:
>
> When I was discussing cases like this with Rob Miller, we also found most
> plausible pluggability points required specific configuration. For this
> example there's the client_templates value. You could possibly have
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 1:35 AM, Chris McDonough wrote:
> > I think we should reconsider the way we decide on views and related
> > components. Perhaps using a routes-like approach, e.g.
> >
> > >...
> >for=".interfaces.IHelpCenter .interfaces.IDocument"
> >/>
> >
> >
On 4/29/09 2:14 PM, Ignacio Ortega wrote:
> Hi:
>
> I made my own classifier to have a specific identifier and challenger when I
> make a request from different sources (browser, script, another app...). But
> I dont get how I can set tha, for example, if my classifier detects that
> it's a script
Hi:
I made my own classifier to have a specific identifier and challenger when I
make a request from different sources (browser, script, another app...). But
I dont get how I can set tha, for example, if my classifier detects that
it's a script request I want that a basic auth acts and the basic a
Hola, Jorge.
On Wednesday April 29, 2009 13:05:07 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> I just looked at this again and it's really interesting.
> The only reason this is a "monkey patch" is because you implemented it
> as such with the "booleanze_predicates" function
>
> according to the python documentation
> h
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris McDonough wrote:
> On 4/28/09 3:01 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
>> I think we should reconsider the way we decide on views and related
>> components. Perhaps using a routes-like approach, e.g.
>>
>>>...
>>for=".interfaces.IHelpC
Hello!
On Wednesday April 29, 2009 12:37:02 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> > On Monday April 27, 2009 10:42:35 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> >> more interesting than that template_vars.tg.identity returns None when
> >> the user isn't logged on. which means you will have to precheck all
> >> your access tests in s
On Apr 27, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Reed O'Brien wrote:
On Apr 27, 2009, at 1:18 PM, Chris McDonough wrote:
I'm actually having a bit of trouble naming those things. At first
they were
called "plugin types", then "provides types", then finally
"component types".
None of those names really work
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> Hola, Jorge.
>
>
> You have two options to do that, which are also simpler (from my point of
> view):
> http://code.gustavonarea.net/repoze.what-pylons/Manual/Misc.html#predicate-evaluators
> http://code.gustavonarea.net/repoze.what-pylons/M
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 6:37 AM, Jorge Vargas wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
>> Hola, Jorge.
>>
>> On Monday April 27, 2009 10:42:35 Jorge Vargas wrote:
> by the way from repoze.what.plugins.pylonshq import is_met is not the
> correct path.
>
apparently the correct
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Gustavo Narea wrote:
> Hola, Jorge.
>
> On Monday April 27, 2009 10:42:35 Jorge Vargas wrote:
>> more interesting than that template_vars.tg.identity returns None when
>> the user isn't logged on. which means you will have to precheck all
>> your access tests in so
2009/4/29 Chris McDonough :
> That seems completely broken to me. It also doesn't match my (limited)
> experience but I've never fought with it hard enough to know.
That should have read: adaptation is like an alphabet:
ABZ
ABC
ZBC
> The real problem with doing the more clever thing is that it'
On 4/29/09 3:07 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
> 2009/4/29 Chris McDonough:
>> If this really is due to the wildcard thing: IMO, zope.component should
>> probably
>> try to match any lookup against wildcard registrations dead last. I'm sorta
>> surprised it doesn't.
>
> It does it in-order with adapters
2009/4/29 Chris McDonough :
> If this really is due to the wildcard thing: IMO, zope.component should
> probably
> try to match any lookup against wildcard registrations dead last. I'm sorta
> surprised it doesn't.
It does it in-order with adapters queried in order of specialization;
but adapters
On 4/29/09 2:41 AM, Malthe Borch wrote:
> 2009/4/29 Chris McDonough:
>> When you do need it, the multiplexing is awful handy (e.g. when trying to
>> look up a view based on a context type and a request type).
>
> Except there's always this situation:
>
> View 1)
>
>for="IDocument IRequest"
>
>
17 matches
Mail list logo
