Hi JJ, On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:26 AM, JJ Zolper <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hey guys, > > I can only imagine how busy everyone has been with Django 1.7 and getting > that wrapped up with all the great new features it includes. I know I have > been spending a good bit of time updating my work. > > I know Russell said here that we were thinking it could be put out in 1.7 > but I totally understand from all that has been going on that it didn't get > released just yet. I looked through and from what I reviewed I didn't see > it just yet which is totally fine. I thought it was fairly simple but I can > see I certainly don't know enough as I see there are a lot of details that > arose in this thread. > > I'm by no means trying to come off as impatient, just if anyone could give > me an update on where things are that would be great as I'm just really > curious about this little app and what changes I would then make. > It's been a while since I've looked at the code, but to the best of my recollection, the code itself was in pretty good shape (after all, there isn't *that* much that needs to be done) - but there were two issues. The first was related to testing, which you've highlighted: > If it's not too much to ask and it is even doable based on how things are > built I was hoping to put in my 2 cents below: > > When Russell said "Both auth.User and emailauth.User have relations with > Group, and the names clash, so the test suite won't start." I have a > comment. > > My best case scenario preference for the name of the app would be > "django.contrib.auth.EmailUser". Would that then solve the issue of the > names clashing as then it would be "auth.User" and "auth.EmailUser"? I also > think it is cleaner to not put "emailauth" and put the home for both "User" > and "EmailUser" in "auth". > Yes, this makes the problem go away. However, I'm not especially happy about this as an approach. On the bikeshed scale, I'm not especially happy about the name "emailauth.EmailUser" - repeating the "email" bit strikes me as a redundancy. The other, bigger issue is the problem that this reveals with swappable models in general. On some level, I consider contrib.auth to be a testbed for the broader feature of swappable models, and while we *could* work around this problem by holding our collective noses about the name, I'd like to take a stab at addressing the bigger problem (or at least establishing that the bigger problem *can't* be solved, so we know nose-holding is a required engineering approach :-) The second problem revealed with a generic solution to email-based auth was the handling around case sensitivity in email usernames (raised by Tilman). Truly RFC-compliant case sensitivity in emails requires a whole bunch of logic that doesn't map well to Django's capabilities; slightly less RFC-compliant solutions are possible, but at the time I proposed the patch, I didn't have enough time to run through all the consequences of these changes. Compounding all this is a lack of time on my part. I'm still keen to see a solution to this problem, and I'm willing to commit to some review and feedback, but I don't have enough cycles at the moment to dedicate to doing this myself. I appreciate this is quite frustrating; it seems like such a little feature, and it keeps getting deferred. Yours, Russ Magee %-) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAJxq84-QvBeNG0fk2gGr_m%2B2NT9tzqgJkZH5ESLH7WHHhFAyTQ%40mail.gmail.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
