-
- 222 Posts
I agree. I just wanted some Input. I would love some documentation to help extend the user management.
-
- 222 Posts
I totally agree with therebechips. If we have good documentation people would be willing to create better user management plugins.
-
- 623 Posts
By no means do I want ModX to provide a complete, robust solution for user management. What I was saying was more along the lines of therebechips’ comments - more accessible way to develop a custom user management system. @opengeek: You’re right. Never disagreed, but maybe I didn’t explain well enough what I meant. The "inside job" I was referring to is the core being accessible in such a way as to let it do the work without a lot of modification to allow for document creation, permissions, groups, etc. Complete and complex components should probably never be included in the core, especially optional functionality. As long as we can more easily access the power of the core for our user management, then I’m happy. @sottwell: I agree 100% with that... A majority of our sites don’t require user management, so it’s nice not to take up resources with unnecessary functionality.
-
- 49 Posts
I agree, there are many different needs, choose one for the kernel limits the other options and choose all the complicated.
This leads to a solution fragments for each case that is what makes a rich and Modx’s different to the other CMS.
What I see here is anxious to hear the new OO syntax fragments and then see if we can model our needs.
Maybe, I say, if classes are determined for each object and have the option of adding more for a beginner in MODx be nicer to customize from an interface or a more graphic form (albeit limited).
That ultimately most people think that Windows is better than Linux that only handled the mouse.
====
Estoy de acuerdo, hay muchas necesidades distintas, elegir una para el núcleo limita las otras opciones y elegir todas lo complica.
Esto nos lleva a una solución con fragmentos para cada caso que es lo que hace rico a Modx y tiene de diferente a los demás CMS.
Lo que veo aquí es ansiedad para conocer la nueva sintaxis de los fragmentos OO y de allí saber si somos capaces de modelarlos a nuestras necesidades.
Tal vez, digo yo, si hay clases determinadas para cada objeto y tiene la opción de agregar más, para un principiante en MODx sería mas amigable para personalizarlos desde una interfaz o un formulario más gráfico (aunque fuese limitado).
Que en definitiva la mayoría piensa que Windows es mejor que Linux por que solo se maneja con el mouse.
-
- 13 Posts
Quote from: splittingred at Jul 06, 2009, 02:52 PM
All can be installed via Package Management, the modxcms.com provider, straight from your Revolution install.
... yes, that’s all working fairly well; how, exactly, are we supposed to display a form on the front-end with which users can register for an account, reset their password, etc.?
[EDIT: I immediately remembered after posting this that the Login module has a reset password function, so ignore that part; still need to know how users are supposed to get registered, though.]
_________________________________________________________
Name's Crates. Just Crates is fine.
I work for Access Technology Group, which lately
has been selling
SOAPware EMR Software as its primary
business model. We're trying to get into health care.
Drop by the site if you'd like an example of a working,
robust web site running on MODx Revolution 2.0.0 (beta-3
at the moment; currently upgrading to beta-4).
If for any reason you need to reach me personally, I am
Typing at G Mail dot Com. Yes, that's my address.
_________________________________________________________
-
- 13 Posts
Yikes. That’s a big one. Literally a show-stopper for me. I really don’t have a choice but to write one now, because it’s going to be necessary to finish this project.
While I’m on the subject of users, logins, ACLs, etcetera... Allow me to include some other concerns I voiced in IRC earlier today.
(10:24:26) Lubo: cr8s: i haven’t used revo too much yet, but as others have just throw in the question and c if someone is albe to answer
(10:24:35) cr8s: Naw, I figured it out
(10:24:43) cr8s: The ACLs are kind of screwy, though
(10:24:46) cr8s: they make poor assumptions
(10:25:03) Lubo: ACLs?
(10:25:07) cr8s: I’m okay with the code assuming _not_ to give access unless specified a resource group with auth permissions
(10:25:25) cr8s: but I’m not okay with the code assuming NOT to give access simply because a resource group was specified to get access
(10:25:31) cr8s: in other words, the way Rev works right now---
(10:25:54) cr8s: If I assign all users, anonymous or registered, access to a page at an authority level of 9000
(10:26:39) cr8s: Then I say that only registered users can view page A, by creating a rule that says that anonymous users specifically _cannot_ view page A at an authority level of 8500
(10:28:04) cr8s: If I add a rule specifically _allowing_ access to page B to the group registered users (also at authority level 8500), but I _don’t_ create a rule saying that anonymous users specifically _cannot_ view page B, WayFinder won’t list page B anyhow
(10:28:30) cr8s: So effectively, even though there’s no rule specifically denying access to page B for anonymous users, it won’t show up on the navigation
(10:29:22) cr8s: Neither pages A or B are accessible, when in reality, Page A should be inaccessible anonymously and Page B should be accessible, because the pre-existing context rule allowing ALL content to be accessible shouldn’t be overridden simply because a resource group was explicitly granted access to a resource
(10:29:34) cr8s: It’s a bug, trust me. It really threw me off for a day or so, too.
(10:29:48) cr8s: Hopefully my boss will be appeased now that I’ve worked around it, though.
(10:31:21) cr8s: Now I just have to figure out what I need to do in order to create a registration form publicly accessible but outside of the back-end manager context
(10:32:07) cr8s: Also, the chunking system really needs to be more protective of its variable scopes
(10:32:25) cr8s: like, if I have a chunk named TruffleShuffle, and it’s not in any category
(10:32:30) cr8s: I can reference it from any snippet
(10:32:47) cr8s: I’m okay with that
(10:32:57) cr8s: but if I put it in a category named ChunkyMonkey
(10:33:37) cr8s: I should really only be able to reference it if either A) the snippet referencing it is also in a category of the same name, or B) I am referencing it explicitly with a call to ChunkyMonkey.TruffleShuffle
(10:33:59) cr8s: That could cause a lot of problems down the line when people start using Revolution to do larger projects
(10:34:08) cr8s: Can’t have variable scopes bleeding all over each other... gets messy.
_________________________________________________________
Name's Crates. Just Crates is fine.
I work for Access Technology Group, which lately
has been selling
SOAPware EMR Software as its primary
business model. We're trying to get into health care.
Drop by the site if you'd like an example of a working,
robust web site running on MODx Revolution 2.0.0 (beta-3
at the moment; currently upgrading to beta-4).
If for any reason you need to reach me personally, I am
Typing at G Mail dot Com. Yes, that's my address.
_________________________________________________________
MODX Staff