to implement UC6 about netbout HOT 22 CLOSED

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 16-Sep-2010 6:26am

In [31/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="31"
refs #15 - new branch created

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 16-Sep-2010 6:29am

In [32/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="32"
refs #15 - user identification design concept introduced

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 16-Sep-2010 6:49am

I have added initial design concept for this ticket with some puzzles. I think we should first clarify [wiki:SRS] in #23, #26, #27, #33, #39, #41, #45 which affect this use case functionality. Thanks for that we will know better how this ticket should be implemented. Please review.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 3:46pm

In [38/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="38"
refs #15 - branch merged into trunk, puzzles present

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 3:47pm

In [39/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="39"
refs #15 - branch closed

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Sep-2010 3:52pm

Good for a start. I think that we can split the task onto two parts: explicit and implicit authentication. In any case, no matter how we design the implicit part, the explicit part will work as normally: email/ID + password.

I think that you can move a bit further with this ticket.. And remember, that puzzles formatted like "@todo #123:2hrs" are for other people, and you estimate the work as 2 hours.

Puzzles formatted as "@todo #123!" mean that you will resolve them yourself, but later.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 19-Sep-2010 11:04am

In [46/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="46"
refs #15 - new branch created

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 19-Sep-2010 11:08am

In [47/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="47"
refs #15 - initial implementation

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 19-Sep-2010 11:09am

Please review.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 19-Sep-2010 3:42pm

Looks good, except:

user ID is going to be a text, not a number (see ActorUser page). user ID is something similar to skype ID, I would use "yegor" for example. and my personal page in netbout.com would be "netbout.com/yegor". I think that USER.ID should stay in the database (it's always good for FaZend), but we have to add something like USER.NAME. This is just an idea… Let me know your thoughts..

Nowhere in SRS it is said that user email has to be unique. In your DB schema it is unique, if I'm not mistaken. Actually I think that you're right, and it HAS TO BE unique, but we need to submit a ticket first, make changes to SRS, and then make it unique in the SQL. Can you submit such a ticket? And inside SQL file you should comment out this line, and place a @todo tag there, explaining that you WILL make it unique once a ticket is resolved.

And I think that current implementation is good (in r47), but it's not complete. It's just a backend, without front-end functionality (I, a user, still can't login/logout). I'm sure you remember about it, but just decided to remind.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 1:20pm

Adrian, I think that we have a little misunderstanding here. Let me explain.

There are two types of "programming" activities in every project: Design and Implementation. Design is when we are taking some concern and resolve it with some concept. For example, we have a concern "whether OAuth is possible at all for us?". Our concept will look like an implementation of some classes/methods that answer the question.

Implementation is when we know already what to do, we just need to implement it. We are not answering to some question, we are just implementing the functionality in order to enable it for testers, and then for end-users.

Design and Implementation normally are accomplished at the same time. We design something, and we implement something.

In this ticket we're talking about Implementation. Thus, you should not place unit tests into design-concepts folder, but right into test/controllers or test/Model. As you mentioned, your test looks exactly like a normal unit test for UserController.php.

We will start Design tasks today, you will see the difference. I feel that it's my fault that we have this misunderstanding, but I'm sure we have time to fix it :)

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 20-Sep-2010 3:14pm

In [48/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="48"
refs #15 - login field introduced for Model_User, code reorganized

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 20-Sep-2010 3:21pm

Ok, I have done required changes in code. Initially I have created test in design-concept folder because we didn't know how registration free identification should work and I have explained there how I see it.

I have added puzzle with time which should be resolved by other developer, because as you earlier wrote I should implement as less as possible and in sub-tickets other developers will make rest.

Please review.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 3:44pm

In [50/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="50"
refs #15 - merged into trunk, puzzles present still

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 3:44pm

In [51/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="51"
refs #15 - branch closed

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 3:46pm

In [52/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="52"
refs #15 - full-scale comment for SQL file

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 20-Sep-2010 4:15pm

puzzle will be resolved in #56

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 16-Nov-2010 9:57am

In [113/netbout]:

#CommitTicketReference repository="netbout" revision="113"
refs #79, #15 - question migrated to a new Trac ticket

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by netcoderpl on 9-Dec-2010 11:00am

Work flow was changed, so what with this ticket?

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 10-Dec-2010 8:14am

I think that we should get back to this ticket a bit later. When we finish with #80.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 22-Jun-2011 9:16pm

This ticket has to be closed, since we're migrating to Java.

from netbout.

migrated from Trac, where originally posted by yegor256 on 23-Nov-2011 9:06am

Milestone JUN11 deleted

from netbout.