Christian Boos wrote: > It would be interesting to know what's your approach for that. Do you > plan to "merge" the AccountManager stuff into existing files or modules > in Trac core, or to keep its current structure and have it like as an > (optional) component?
Currently, most of the new stuff will end up in trac.accounts. However, the form based login will be merged with trac.web.auth. The current idea is to respect server provided auth. If none is configured, then form based auth is used against the session store backend. > Most importantly, is the BEER-WARE license used by the account manager > compatible for inclusion in Trac core? ;-) Well, seeing as we can do whatever we want with is as long as we remain the notice intact, I would say yes. However, as Matt Good is the original author, we can probably get him to re-license it. What say ye, Matt? > I suppose the code could certainly be enhanced so that authenticate() > gets called only once, either by the authname or by the perm callbacks, > but not by both (should be as simple as using req.authname in > RequestDispatcher._get_perm). > > But we don't want to authenticate every requests because of the Chrome > component which can serve static content from htdocs. For those, we want > as little overhead as possible. Yeah, s I woke up this morning I realized that this was the case and that we do want to retain the lack of authenticate on chrome. Thanks for the reply. -John --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
