RE: [Phplib-users] auth url question

[Rob H. <rob...@ws...>]

I disagree on two points.

1) I am new to the php-lib world, but from what I have been told, the 7.2
stuff is much more structured that the curent development stuff, and this is
the core issue that I see.

2) Registration may have special needs, but this is the point of having
local.inc.  Single, two-phase, and approval based registration can easliy be
offered as examples, and probably be used "off the shelf" in a lot of
circumstances...

> -----Original Message-----
> From: php...@li...
> [mailto:php...@li...]On Behalf Of Matt
> Williams
> Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 9:54 AM
> To: Phplib-Users
> Subject: Re: [Phplib-users] auth url question
>
>
>
> On Thursday 31 October 2002 14:23, Rob Hutton wrote:
> > The more I think about this, the less I agree, because I think that auth
> > logic was/is flawed.  But attached is a version that I think
> will drop in.
>
> hi all
>
> I've missed most of this thread so forgive me if I've missed
> something or am
> heading off in the wrong direction.
>
> From what I gather a summary of this thread is about using mode=reg or
> something similar in the url to invoke registration, is this correct?
>
> From my point of the view this would be a waste of time. Each application
>  that I use phplib on invariably has different requirements for
> registration.
>  For me it is easier to keep registration to it's own page where I can
>  control error checking on the form fields, add/remove fields as I wish
>  without having to worry about anything in phplib that might get
>  broken/compromised in the process.
>
> IMHO it seems like that the project has lost it's way a little in terms of
> what it should do, what it needs to do as a project as a whole and what
> people feel it should do to best help them.
>
> What I think needs to happen is to maybe have a more defined development
>  path, possibly. For someone to say, right that's it for new
> stuff to go in,
>  let's get it tested and out.
> Just looking at the task manager on sourceforge shows the is very
> little in
> the way of defined goals for each release. If something good comes up from
> feature requests or from someones own development, then fine add it in as
> long as it's not gonna put too much on the next release and only
> if it's for
> the benefit of the project as a whole.
>
> So for example it has been discussed about getting the latest dev out for
> testing then release. I think this would be a good idea, but only
> as long as
> no more extra stuff keeps getting added in in the meantime. If we do this
> we'll never get it our of the door.
>
> The main aim of the next release seems to be to get it working with php4
> sessions and register globals off. So we should get this tested,
> debugged and
> released. Then and, only then would it be time to move on.
>
> my 2p
>
> matt
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> This sf.net email is sponsored by: Influence the future
> of Java(TM) technology. Join the Java Community
> Process(SM) (JCP(SM)) program now.
> http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?sunm0004en
> _______________________________________________
> Phplib-users mailing list
> Php...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/phplib-users
>