Re: Creating an independent auth/permission-framework, separate the models (Was: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs)

> I'm thinking of different applications needing some > authentication-system. [...] you will > end up in having different systems in every application (in the worst > case, think of third-party-applications). [...] > If instead every application uses some generic calls to get the > user-data, man

Re: Creating an independent auth/permission-framework, separate the models (Was: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs)

On 2/27/07, David Danier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As an enhancement it would be nice to get the generic-auth-branch into > the trunk (slightly changed perhaps). So not only authorization can be > done on an abstract way, but permission-checks, too. I'll probably work on this once the newfor

Re: Creating an independent auth/permission-framework, separate the models (Was: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs)

> I'm much more of the opinion nowadays that Django doesn't necessarily > need an overreaching and generic authentication/authorization > framework. Yes and no. On the one hand it is not needed, besides for the admin (which gets separated somehow, as you said later in your email). On the other ha

Re: Creating an independent auth/permission-framework, separate the models (Was: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs)

On 2/19/07, David Danier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I would like to contribute creating this, if someone is interested. > Perhaps the best place to start (or even work if Joseph Kocherhans likes > my plans?) is the generic-auth-branch. I believe such a system should be > ready with Django 1.0.

Creating an independent auth/permission-framework, separate the models (Was: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs)

I'll pick this topic up for some changes I think Django needs. Please read the summary between the "="-line, if you don't have the time to read the whole mail. Perhaps it will get you interested in reading the rest. ;-) As far as I can see there are different approaches to improve this (which hav

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

This is great! Would this be rolled in the latest SVSN version? On Feb 12, 6:04 pm, "RonnyPfannschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > sweet - thats a good start > > On 12 Feb., 17:21, "Gary Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 12, 9:01 am, "RonnyPfannschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wro

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

sweet - thats a good start On 12 Feb., 17:21, "Gary Wilson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Feb 12, 9:01 am, "RonnyPfannschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > in some case the only way to do it right is a replacement (like using > > a mail as username) > > You would probably be interested in

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

On Feb 12, 9:01 am, "RonnyPfannschmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > in some case the only way to do it right is a replacement (like using > a mail as username) You would probably be interested in ticket 3011, which aims to make the auth User model replaceable. There is even a patch to get you s

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

You could write an authentication backend to auth on the email address: John. On 2/12/07, RonnyPfannschmidt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > adding a profile doesnt fix all problems > > in some case the

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

adding a profile doesnt fix all problems in some case the only way to do it right is a replacement (like using a mail as username) some might argue you could use profiles to do this stuff, but that would encourage messy code, denormalized data models and not really good practices to make it work

Re: Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

Hi, http://www.b-list.org/weblog/2006/06/06/django-tips-extending-user-model does this help? You can extend the User model with another class that gets related to it. Sure it should be documented in djangoproject.com but couldn't find it there... I'll look deeper ;) On 2/12/07, RonnyPfannschmid

Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

The build-in User model is nice in many Cases, but sometimes it just is a bad limit for Development cause of its limits, but just droping it would cause the loss of all auth features, and doesnt play well with 3rd Party apps Examples are : * Email as Username * _long_ Usernames * special Characte

Adding support for replacing the auth User model to fit custom needs

The build-in User model is nice in many Cases, but sometimes it just is a bad limit for Development cause of its limits, but just droping it would cause the loss of all auth features, and doesnt play well with 3rd Party apps Examples are : * Email as Username * _long_ Usernames * special Characte