Re: Aida-Roles and Aida-Parties

Le samedi 17 mai 2008 à 14:13 +0200, Janko Mivšek a écrit :
> Nicolas Petton wrote:
> 
> > I'm thinking about the usefulness of Aida-Roles and Aida-Parties...
> > I don't think those 2 packages should be included Aida. First, IMHO it
> > has nothing to do in a web framework, and it makes Aida bigger for
> > almost nothing. Maybe we should keep only the Person class, or move it
> > to Scribo?
> 
> Party Role framework can be very valuable when you build more complex 
> security scenarios, for introducing role based access control for 
> instance. So even that is currently not used, can be in near future.
> 
> Duty of any framework is to provide tools for you and not necessary for 
> other parts of framework alone. And from my experience this tool is 
> valuable, that's why I decided to move it directly to Aida.
> 
> Another reason is that because of lack of such framework we have now two 
> objects for persons: WebUser and Person in Scribo. With party/role 
> framework in Aida we can now migrate in only one: Person with a WebUser 
> role!
> 
> Party role framework currently looks quite complicated but when a bit of 
> description will (hopefully soon) arise you see that it is not so 
> complicated as seems. But very powerful.

I didn't say it wasn't, but Aida is a web framework, not a Role/Party
framework. IMHO it's not its role to provide such party framework, and
it has nothing to do with web programming. Furthermore, I like to have
things clean and optimized, and instead of this role/party framework, I
would rather work on a persistence framework, which is more needed in my
opinion, and at least has something to do with a web framework.

Cheers!

Nico
-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nico.bioskop.fr
            ___
          ooooooo
         OOOOOOOOO
        |Smalltalk|
         OOOOOOOOO
          ooooooo
           \   /
            [|]
--------------------------------
Ma clé PGP est disponible ici :
http://nico.bioskop.fr/pgp-key.html

Le samedi 17 mai 2008 à 14:13 +0200, Janko Mivšek a écrit :
> Nicolas Petton wrote:
> 
> > I'm thinking about the usefulness of Aida-Roles and Aida-Parties...
> > I don't think those 2 packages should be included Aida. First, IMHO it
> > has nothing to do in a web framework, and it makes Aida bigger for
> > almost nothing. Maybe we should keep only the Person class, or move it
> > to Scribo?
> 
> Party Role framework can be very valuable when you build more complex 
> security scenarios, for introducing role based access control for 
> instance. So even that is currently not used, can be in near future.
> 
> Duty of any framework is to provide tools for you and not necessary for 
> other parts of framework alone. And from my experience this tool is 
> valuable, that's why I decided to move it directly to Aida.
> 
> Another reason is that because of lack of such framework we have now two 
> objects for persons: WebUser and Person in Scribo. With party/role 
> framework in Aida we can now migrate in only one: Person with a WebUser 
> role!
> 
> Party role framework currently looks quite complicated but when a bit of 
> description will (hopefully soon) arise you see that it is not so 
> complicated as seems. But very powerful.

I didn't say it wasn't, but Aida is a web framework, not a Role/Party
framework. IMHO it's not its role to provide such party framework, and
it has nothing to do with web programming. Furthermore, I like to have
things clean and optimized, and instead of this role/party framework, I
would rather work on a persistence framework, which is more needed in my
opinion, and at least has something to do with a web framework.

Cheers!

Nico
--

-- 
Nicolas Petton
http://nico.bioskop.fr
            ___
          ooooooo
         OOOOOOOOO
        |Smalltalk|
         OOOOOOOOO
          ooooooo
           \   /
            [|]
--------------------------------
Ma clé PGP est disponible ici :
http://nico.bioskop.fr/pgp-key.html