Re: [Openinteract-help] Separate security tables?

[Vsevolod (S. I. <si...@cs...>]

Chris,

Thanks for looking at the setter method. I assume the fix is 
straightforward (I'd like to start using it asap). You also have a note 
about this in the SPOPS man page:

***
Note that unlike get, You cannot use the shortcut of using the parameter 
name as a method. So a call like:

  my $username = $obj->username( 'new_username' );

Will silently ignore any parameters that are passed and simply return 
the information as get() would.
***

> The SPOPS model is one class == one table, so the general answer is no. 
> It would probably be best to just have SPOPS create a separate class for 
> every table you want to access.
> 
> (BTW, why do you want to do this?)

Paranoia. I had a home-grown security system (SPOPS without steroids :) 
which at first utilized a single table. A couple of times bugs in the 
persistence code screwed the whole table up, so I broke up the security 
info into separate tables. Then yesterday I was changing something in 
the spops_security table on the mysql command line and made a mistake 
again. So the old fears flared up.

> Something else you could do: each of your SPOPS classes could override 
> 'global_security_object_class()' and have each call set the table name 
> in the one security object class. This is very tricky and potentially 
> bug ridden, but it might look like:
> 
> # 'My::SecurityObject' is your application's security class
> # 'my_table' is the table you want to use for this class
> 
> sub global_security_object_class {
>     my ( $item ) = @_;
>     My::SecurityObject->CONFIG->{table_name} = 'my_table';
>     return 'My::SecurityObject';
> }

AFAIU, you call this potentially bug-ridden because this assumes that, 
if I put this in a superclass, each subclass will have to process its 
config before next class's global_security_object_class() is invoked?
I'll give it a try.

Thanks,
Simon

-- 

Simon (Vsevolod ILyushchenko)   si...@cs...
				http://www.simonf.com

America's business leaders simply don't want to think
about complex technology issues - they want to think
about golf. Microsoft promises them that.
			Andrew Grygus, www.aaxnet.com