i think we are converging on some good ideas an solutions here.
definately there are some packages that abuse acs_objects and permissions.
the current survey package is an example of abuse of acs_objects, and
bboard is an example of abuse of permissions. something i think would help
OACS a lot is better guidelines for application developers as to what to make
an acs_object and when/where to use permissions. (note i am not offering
myself as the author of these guidelines, i hate writing and am not good at it)
i think the suggestion of having a subclass of acs_objects for permissioned
objects is interesting. we could still write general services for acs_objects
that would be inherited by all, while making a leaner, meaner, permissions
infrastructure. i think this would help ease peoples concerns about
performance of the permissions system given that the set of
permissioned_objects would reduce in size drastically. for example, even if
acs_rels remained acs_objects, i don't see a need for them to be
permissioned_objects. this alone would reduce the number of permissioned
rows drastically.
i agree with don that the object_type system needs help. there are a lot of
gratuitous constraints and limitations on the acs_object_types table itself.
this makes development a pain. i was supposed to test a "loosened up"
version of acs_object_types but have not had time to do it. if i get to it i will
post my findings, if anyone else feels up to the task of doing this, post here
and i will post my suggestions, i know don has some too.
i am a big advocate for a leaner content-repository. lets just say that there
were many heated arguments about this at aD and i think the wrong side got
their way :). as everyone else has said, CR should just be a storage system,
ideally just a table and api. yes one table. it would containt id, title,
content_type, content_locale, and content. i might be forgetting one or two i
haven't thought about this in a while. all the other services provided by the
current CR should be built on top of this. it shouldn't be the case that all
content i store HAS to be versioned. this just doesn't make sense. i know this
is a pretty deep change but i think people here aren't averse to change and
also see the benefit in this.
concretely, i would like to see these things fixed for OACS 4.6 but i think that
might be too much.
ok, that's about as much as i can write in one sitting, i don't have the stamina
that don and lars do. btw, i would participate in these forums a lot more often
if i could reply to them via email, i HATE this interface.
