Utility Registration was:RE: [Zope3-Users] pluggable authentication utility

[Roger Ineichen]

Hi Jim,

perhaps we can discuss this on zope3-dev.

From: Jim Fulton [mailto:jim at zope.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 12:03 PM
> To: dev at projekt01.ch
> Cc: 'GMane'; zope3-users at zope.org
> Subject: Re: [Zope3-Users] pluggable authentication utility
> 
> Roger Ineichen wrote:
> > Hi Ricki  
> > 
> > On Behalf Of GMane
> > 
> >>Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2005 5:52 PM
> >>To: zope3-users at zope.org
> >>Subject: [Zope3-Users] pluggable authentication utility
> >>
> >>Hi,
> >>I have a simple question about pluggable authentication.
> >>
> >>I created a folder and I made it a site.
> >>In the default Site-Management Folder I created a Pluggable 
> >>Authentication 
> >>Utility (named plaut).
> >>Inside it I made a PrincipalFolder (Partner) and added a user soc1.
> > 
> > 
> > Don't give a name (plau). Pluggable authentication utilities
> > are as dfault unnamed. All components right now will lookup the
> > PAU with name=''.
> 
> For 3.2, we need to find a way to make this clearer.  Either 
> we need to
> provide a more verbose description of what the name is for or 
> perhaps, as
> Stephan has suggested, for components that are always looked 
> up without names,
> we should not provide the option of entering a name and, for 
> others, we
> should require a name.

We have to totaly hide this part and offer a different concept.
Of corse the normal registration will be available too. 

I propose to add something like a policy. A policy should register
a utility. This means we can add policies via ZCML and the user can 
only process this policy which registers the utility in a predefind 
way.

Then we can provide a task like. "register PAU" and everything gets
registred. There could also be a different policy like:
"register PAU with initial principal folder" etc.

A ZCML directive could look like:

<utilityPolicy
    name="Add PAU with principal Folder"
    for=".interfaces.IPluggableAuthentication"
    class=".authentication.AddPAUWithPrincipalFolderPolicy"
    />

Then we can offer adding utilities via this policies.

If somebody likes to register a utility in a different way, he can 
add own policies for a utility.

I use this pattern in a own registry in a different usecase. It makes
it very simple for anduser and even me to register components in a 
registry. And you don't have to know every little about the registration
process.

What do yo think about that? Any other ideas?

Regards
Roger Ineichen

Projekt01 GmbH
www.projekt01.ch
_____________________________
END OF MESSAGE  

> Jim
> 
> -- 
> Jim Fulton           mailto:jim at zope.com       Python Powered!
> CTO                  (540) 361-1714            http://www.python.org
> Zope Corporation     http://www.zope.com       http://www.zope.org
>