I have a proof of concept implementation of the admin robot as
described above.
The first version of the patch is inside the issue :
http://code.google.com/p/wave-protocol/issues/detail?id=162

On Nov 20, 8:02 pm, Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
> Ok, I started to work on the admin robot for wiab.
> Here how I think it will work:
> Robot will be hosted on the wiab server, the robot
> ( [email protected]) will be registered automatically on server
> start up.
> The robot will be passed Injector into constructor so it will have
> access to wiab server objects (including accounts)
> The password reset module will be exposed as robot proxy i.e. services
> [email protected]
> If added to a wave it will allow to reset passwords via command line
> like syntax (using CLIhttp://commons.apache.org/cli/)
> The implementation will also add some abstraction layer to allow  easy
> plugin of more admin modules as robot proxies.
> How does it sound?
>
> On Oct 29, 11:57 am, Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Ohh. I intended to use Echoey code as example off course and extend
> > AbstractAgent. Is there an example of working robot?
>
> > On Oct 29, 9:20 am, Alex North <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > Depending what you mean by "agent-based", please avoid using the code in
> > > box.server.agents. That code is earmarked for deletion; it was a rush job
> > > and does things in an ugly way. Its presence significantly hampers other
> > > development. We're only leaving it around to support the "echoey" agent
> > > which is the only way to tell you've successfully federated with acmewave.
> > > As soon as we've ported echoey to a robot we intend to delete the code.
>
> > > You could build new code talking to the c/s protocol - with code review 
> > > I'm
> > > optimistic we can do it right this time.
>
> > > A.
>
> > > On 29 October 2010 17:58, Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > It seems to me that agent based password reset mechanism is pretty
> > > > simple. I ll try to implement it and see if it gets more complex that
> > > > I thought.
>
> > > > On Oct 29, 2:04 am, Alex North <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > On 29 October 2010 10:44, Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > Hmm, I don't see a way how "password reset mechanism" can be outside
> > > > > > of the
> > > > > > authenticated world.Adminshould be authenticated into something (DB
> > > > > > at least).
>
> > > > > Sorry, I wasn't very clear. Yes, admins should be authenticated when
> > > > > administering the user database.
>
> > > > > Any self-password-reset mechanism would need to be unauthenticated 
> > > > > (but
> > > > then
> > > > > rely on some other verification system, like sending an email to a 
> > > > > known
> > > > > address).
>
> > > > > > If you want the most simple wavy password reset mechanism - do it 
> > > > > > with
> > > > > > agent.
> > > > > > -Invite agent into wave.
> > > > > > -Issue password reset command
> > > > > > -Agent has the access to users accounts, so it can check if the user
> > > > > > is authorized for such action, if so - it resets the password. 
> > > > > > Cannot
> > > > > > be simpler than that and easy to implement - and still wavy.
>
> > > > > I love your passion for implementing things the wavy way! Experience 
> > > > > has
> > > > > taught me that it's more complex than you make it out, though.
>
> > > > > > On Oct 29, 1:26 am, Alex North <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > I happen to agree with Vega that hosting profile information in 
> > > > > > > Wave
> > > > has
> > > > > > > many advantages. However I disagree just on one piece: the login
> > > > > > > information. I do think the username and password need to
> > > > > > > be manageable outside of Wave itself. They provide kind of a 
> > > > > > > minimal
> > > > > > > bootstrapping environment you need. First you get a username and
> > > > > > password,
> > > > > > > then you can log into Wave.
>
> > > > > > > Clearly the password reset mechanism needs to be outside of the
> > > > > > > authenticated world. I think it's simplest to put basic password
> > > > > > management
> > > > > > > (changing your password when you already know it) outside of waves
> > > > too.
> > > > > > > Building data models in Wave is nice and flexible, but it's a lot 
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > > overhead for something as basic as login credentials.
>
> > > > > > > In many cases, authentication will be delegated to some other 
> > > > > > > system,
> > > > > > LDAP
> > > > > > > for example. We're just trying to implement something basic for
> > > > groups
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > don't have such a system.
>
> > > > > > > On 29 October 2010 05:03, Vega <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > The advantage is obvious - you have everything in one place.
> > > > Another
> > > > > > > > advantage - the Wave environment - it means an option for
> > > > extension.
> > > > > > > > For example you can create a simple profile wave. Then you (or 
> > > > > > > > some
> > > > > > > > 3rd party) can add extension that would import user info from
> > > > facebook
> > > > > > > > etc...
>
> > > > > > > > On Oct 28, 1:03 pm, x00 <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Even if you have a gadget, you still need an interface to do 
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > management. I don't see much advantage of embedding this 
> > > > > > > > > within a
> > > > > > > > > wavelet.
>
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
> > > > > > > > Google
> > > > > > Groups
> > > > > > > > "Wave Protocol" group.
> > > > > > > > To post to this group, send email to
> > > > [email protected].
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > > > [email protected]<wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog
> > > > > > > >  legroups.com>
> > > > <wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog legroups.com>
> > > > > > <wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog legroups.com>
> > > > > > > > .
> > > > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
>
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > > > Groups
> > > > > > "Wave Protocol" group.
> > > > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > > > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > > > [email protected]<wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog
> > > > > >  legroups.com>
> > > > <wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog legroups.com>
> > > > > > .
> > > > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > > > >http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.
>
> > > > --
> > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
> > > > Groups
> > > > "Wave Protocol" group.
> > > > To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
> > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > > > [email protected]<wave-protocol%2bunsubscr...@goog
> > > >  legroups.com>
> > > > .
> > > > For more options, visit this group at
> > > >http://groups.google.com/group/wave-protocol?hl=en.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave 
Protocol" 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/wave-protocol?hl=en.

Reply via email to