gnue-dev
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnue-dev] Appserver/Common Issues


From: Jason Cater
Subject: Re: [Gnue-dev] Appserver/Common Issues
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:09:31 -0600

See inline. 

On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 00:39:14 +0100
Jan Ischebeck <address@hidden> wrote:

> Just some points about appserver and forms and 3- and 2- tier setups.
> 
> I. Security:
> 
> Requirements
> 1. user authentification (not only against a database)

Please refer to common/doc/technote/00005.txt.  This is already in
place. 

> 2. different access rights for different users
> 3. different forms/reports/processes(GPD) for different users
> 
> The first and second point can be done without many changes in
> forms/reports/common....
> To solve the third point there are three posible solutions:
> 
> a) add <if user=...> tags to the form file [ IMHO Very BAD ]
> b) download forms from a webserver and let the webserver choose the
> right form definition for the right user [difficult to setup, but
> needs no change to code]
> c) add <if user=> code to navigators process definitions and let
> navigator provide the right form definition for the right user to
> forms[probably the best solution IMHO]
> d) autogenerate forms out of database/appserver metadata [easy
> maintenable]

We definitely need to look at this. 

> 
> II. Appserver vs. Common
> 
> I think we need a delegates/plugin architecture for common. I think so
> because IMHO we need a common which can be very powerfull and very
> lean at the same time. The "I prefer 2-tier" gnue developers need
> authentification adapters, possibly they want to access business
> objects too. But they don't want to add another layer, don't want to
> use 3-tier. Ok, no problem. Just make these extra functionality be
> plugable into common dbabstraction, or even moved from appserver to
> common.

That's pretty much how everything in GNUe-Common works and why we keep
pushing the AppServer guys to reuse Common as much as possible. 

> Jan

-- Jason




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]