[Zope-CMF] RFC: PAS and the (non?) future of members

[robert rottermann]

Rob,

we are in the midst off creating a Zope/Plone structure for a cluster of 
Universities here in Switzerland.
I have been using CMF-Member in a number of sites and have never been 
happy with it. This stems mainly from the fact that I used a very early 
version for which no clean upgrade path ever existed.

I really would like to propose to use membrane for this project (and its 
many subprojects).

The target release date for the sites is mid 2006. Now my question:

Do you expect membrane to be in a solid state by then?
We would of course be contributing as much as we can and the project 
would be a perfect testbed.

However I need a strategy how we could go live in mid 2006 without using 
membrane . (and without redoing to much).

We (probably) will be using Zope 2.9x and Plone 2.1x.
There will be a cluster of Zope sites/subsites but all of them should be 
using a shared user management system.

I really would like to hear your oppinion.

Robert

PS:And we are also redoing one of the sites using CMFMember and I am 
looking for an exit strategy for that as well (however no migration of 
existing user data is planned)



Rob Miller wrote:
> hi all,
>
> i'm wondering if it's not time to rethink the entire idea of members as
> they currently exist in CMF.  members were originally a necessary evil,
> because the user folder implementation of users didn't allow for enough
> flexibility to support CMF's needs.  now, however, PAS makes it possible
> to encapsulate all of the necessary behaviour in the user objects
> themselves, and it should be possible to eliminate the complexity of
> wrapping the user object altogether.
>
> over the last few days at the snow sprint here in austria i've been
> working on a Plone-based product called Membrane.  Membrane implements PAS
> plugins which allow portal content to be used as the authentication,
> property, group, role, etc. providers for users.  it's quite nice, i
> think, very flexible and powerful, and i think it contains ideas that
> might do well in CMF itself.
>
> even if the content-based plug-ins are not desireable, i think it's still
> worth investigating the use of PAS and the idea of deprecating the
> member/user duality altogether.  anyone else interested in this approach?
>
> -r
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zope-CMF maillist  -  Zope-CMF at lists.zope.org
> http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-cmf
>
> See http://collector.zope.org/CMF for bug reports and feature requests
>
>