Comments on: Farcry – Extending Just About Everything

By: Geoff Bowers

Geoff Bowers — Wed, 17 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000

@Scott – both approaches are totally valid; it’s always interesting to hear why a team goes one way or another.

I ask because we’re looking at overhauling the security sub-system in 4.1 and one feature I’m lobbying for is the ability to more easily hook up a custom content type to user login.

Now that it’s so easy to construct content types with formtools, we’re trying to give folks the opportunity to swap in whatever they want.

In any event great article, and as Mat says, “keep it coming”!

By: Geoff Bowers

Geoff Bowers — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000

Is there any particular reason you chose to extend dmProfile, rather than say build your own profile content type?

By: Matthew bryant

Matthew bryant — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000

Mate, this is an excellent explanation of things. Keep it coming.

By: Scott Stroz

Scott Stroz — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0000

@Geoff – We chose to extend dmProfile because we wanted to keep the profile tied to a user login. At the time it just seemed easier to extend dmProfile rather than to muck around with the security to link the user to a different object.

I would not be surprised if you respond back saying, ‘Well, you could have done this …’. I have found that there usually is more than one way to accomplish something in FarCry (another reason why I like it as much as I do). This was a way that worked for us, and at the time, seemed like the most efficient use of our time to meet the requirement.