Nicolas Petton wrote:
>> 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.
User/Group/Security framework is also not necessary for a web framework
but we all know how big advantage is that for Aida.
Party framework looks not so important in the first sight but when you
start solving already mentioned WebUser/Person duality, you soon come to
conclusion that you need to move part of party framework to Aida. But if
you move part, why not more, at least as much as needed that party
framework is complete. That was my line of thinking when decided to move
it to Aida.
Also, don't underestimate all possible and not possible security needs
by your customers. Role based security for instance is quite common
those days. Just think Oracle for instance.
I don't say that party framework couldn't be simplified, but to
completely remove it, well, this is a step back from my viewpoint.
Janko
--
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si_______________________________________________
Aida mailing list
Aida@...
http://lists.aidaweb.si/mailman/listinfo/aida
