Re: [Zope-dev] [Checkins] SVN: z3c.layer.pagelet/trunk/ Removed dependency on``zope.app.security`` by using the new packages``zope.authentication`` and ``zope.principalregistry``.
Am 15.03.2009 um 23:47 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Michael
Can you explain why you implemented the login viewlets?
The login in zope.app.security is implemented using browser pages and metal-macros and is not really customizable. I needed a login/logout which works fine with pagelets and behaves like the one in zope.app.security as I think zope.app.security was not implemented so badly.
What does this viewlets have to do with the pagelet layer?
It's a pagelet implementation of login/logout, so I thought it matches the goal of this package very well.
I think they are very project specific and should go to an explicit package which offers login viewlets.
I'm not sure about this, as the implementation as adopted from the one in zope.app.security. I don't think the one in zope.app.security is project specific. But I might be wrong.
The pagelet layer has nothing to do with such explicit implementations. The z3c.layer.pagelet package offers only the minimum setup for make pagelets traversable and offers error handling etc.
My implementation does not even require new dependencies. ``zope.authentication`` and ``zope.principalregistry`` where split out from zope.app.security to reduce dependencies.
What do you think, can we move your viewlet part into another package which is based on z3c.layer.pagelet or probably on z3c.layer.ready2go which uses the pagelet layer too?
It could be an idea to add it to z3c.layer.ready2go which currently only contains some interfaces. But a completely new package seems a bit overkill to me. Yours sincerely, -- Michael Howitz · mh@gocept.com · software developer gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development
Hi Michael
Betreff: Re: AW: [Checkins] SVN: z3c.layer.pagelet/trunk/ Removed dependency on``zope.app.security`` by using the new packages``zope.authentication`` and ``zope.principalregistry``.
Am 15.03.2009 um 23:47 schrieb Roger Ineichen:
Hi Michael
Can you explain why you implemented the login viewlets?
The login in zope.app.security is implemented using browser pages and metal-macros and is not really customizable. I needed a login/logout which works fine with pagelets and behaves like the one in zope.app.security as I think zope.app.security was not implemented so badly.
What does this viewlets have to do with the pagelet layer?
It's a pagelet implementation of login/logout, so I thought it matches the goal of this package very well.
Yes and No. It's of corse usefull to have predefined login views available. But I use a z3c.form based implementation for this. Which means I don't need them. Everything else in z3c.layer.pagelet is needed by everyone. Otherwise the pagelet pattern doesn't work. This let me think that everything which is not needed by default in z3c.layer.pagelet should go to another package because it's only optional. Then z3c.layer.pagelet is only a base implmentation for make pagelet working and is used in other packages as mixin.
I think they are very project specific and should go to an explicit package which offers login viewlets.
I'm not sure about this, as the implementation as adopted from the one in zope.app.security. I don't think the one in zope.app.security is project specific. But I might be wrong.
I think that's right.
The pagelet layer has nothing to do with such explicit implementations. The z3c.layer.pagelet package offers only the minimum setup for make pagelets traversable and offers error handling etc.
My implementation does not even require new dependencies. ``zope.authentication`` and ``zope.principalregistry`` where split out from zope.app.security to reduce dependencies.
What do you think, can we move your viewlet part into another package which is based on z3c.layer.pagelet or probably on z3c.layer.ready2go which uses the pagelet layer too?
It could be an idea to add it to z3c.layer.ready2go which currently only contains some interfaces. But a completely new package seems a bit overkill to me.
Ok, sounds good to me. I'll take a closer look at that and let you know if I change something. Regards Roger Ineichen
Yours sincerely, -- Michael Howitz · mh@gocept.com · software developer gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development
Am 16.03.2009 um 16:43 schrieb Roger Ineichen: [...]
It's a pagelet implementation of login/logout, so I thought it matches the goal of this package very well.
Yes and No. It's of corse usefull to have predefined login views available. But I use a z3c.form based implementation for this.
I thought this as the next step: the template for cookie login is not really nice and makes wrong assumptions (e. g. unauthenticated principal has the id zope.anybody). So I planned to replace it with a z3c.form based login form. But this would add a new dependency and I was not sure if this is a good idea. Yours sincerely, -- Michael Howitz · mh@gocept.com · software developer gocept gmbh & co. kg · forsterstraße 29 · 06112 halle (saale) · germany http://gocept.com · tel +49 345 1229889 8 · fax +49 345 1229889 1 Zope and Plone consulting and development
2009/3/16 Michael Howitz <mh@gocept.com>:
Am 16.03.2009 um 16:43 schrieb Roger Ineichen: [...]
It's a pagelet implementation of login/logout, so I thought it matches the goal of this package very well.
Yes and No. It's of corse usefull to have predefined login views available. But I use a z3c.form based implementation for this.
I thought this as the next step: the template for cookie login is not really nice and makes wrong assumptions (e. g. unauthenticated principal has the id zope.anybody). So I planned to replace it with a z3c.form based login form. But this would add a new dependency and I was not sure if this is a good idea.
Look at my latests changes in zope.app.authentication loginForm template, it cleans up the template by separating camefrom/unauthenticated logic into a python class. I think you should do the same for your implementation. -- WBR, Dan Korostelev
participants (3)
-
Dan Korostelev -
Michael Howitz -
Roger Ineichen