Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
Locked
Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
 
|
What about adding field(s) to the UserLogin entity to describe the
user login record? It could be just a "description" field, or maybe a "firstName"/"lastName" pair (all of them will be optional). The idea is that, in a framework only installation, you don't have the Party/Person entities, but you can create UserLogin records (with associated permissions) to interact with the system. It would be nice to have a mean to add some optional details to the UserLogin. What do you think? Jacopo |
smime.p7s (3K)
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
This could be a common term called displayName. I'm for it.
Andrew On Apr 21, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Ashish Vijaywargiya wrote: > Hello Jacopo, > > I hope you are doing good now a days. :-) > I like the idea of adding a field in UserLogin table. > > But instead of Description or FirstName/ LastName pair I would > prefer to add > field by title "User Name". > It will contain the First Name + Last Name or which ever name is > provided > from the console if we run ant create-admin-user target (we can add > this > option on the available ant target). And it will be Self Explanatory > for > readers I guess. > > Thoughts ? > > -- > Ashish > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Jacopo Cappellato < > [hidden email]> wrote: > >> What about adding field(s) to the UserLogin entity to describe the >> user >> login record? >> It could be just a "description" field, or maybe a >> "firstName"/"lastName" >> pair (all of them will be optional). >> The idea is that, in a framework only installation, you don't have >> the >> Party/Person entities, but you can create UserLogin records (with >> associated >> permissions) to interact with the system. >> It would be nice to have a mean to add some optional details to the >> UserLogin. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Jacopo >> >> |
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Thank you Ashish and Andrew for the feedback.
displayName sounds a good suggestion; I also like userName, what do you think? To all, can I go on with this change? Jacopo On Apr 22, 2009, at 5:50 PM, Andrew Zeneski wrote: > This could be a common term called displayName. I'm for it. > > Andrew > > On Apr 21, 2009, at 6:48 AM, Ashish Vijaywargiya wrote: > >> Hello Jacopo, >> >> I hope you are doing good now a days. :-) >> I like the idea of adding a field in UserLogin table. >> >> But instead of Description or FirstName/ LastName pair I would >> prefer to add >> field by title "User Name". >> It will contain the First Name + Last Name or which ever name is >> provided >> from the console if we run ant create-admin-user target (we can add >> this >> option on the available ant target). And it will be Self >> Explanatory for >> readers I guess. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> -- >> Ashish >> >> On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 4:00 PM, Jacopo Cappellato < >> [hidden email]> wrote: >> >>> What about adding field(s) to the UserLogin entity to describe the >>> user >>> login record? >>> It could be just a "description" field, or maybe a >>> "firstName"/"lastName" >>> pair (all of them will be optional). >>> The idea is that, in a framework only installation, you don't have >>> the >>> Party/Person entities, but you can create UserLogin records (with >>> associated >>> permissions) to interact with the system. >>> It would be nice to have a mean to add some optional details to the >>> UserLogin. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Jacopo >>> >>> > |
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
Administrator
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
Administrator
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
Administrator
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
I can't believe we're still having this discussion :-)
+1 for displayName Regards Scott HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com On 1/05/2009, at 8:59 PM, Rishi Solanki wrote: > Whenever we use userName or something like that (displayUserName) will > definitely create confusions with userLoginId. > As I stated before username parameter is mapped to userLoginId at many > places in ofbiz. > +1 for displayName. > > -- > Rishi Solanki > Enterprise Software Developer > HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd. > > On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 2:52 AM, David E Jones > <[hidden email]>wrote: > >> >> Yeah, if we have two alternatives that might be confusing, why not >> combine >> them and create a frankenstein option that will _definitely_ be >> confusing! >> ;) >> >> I'm for displayName... when people say "user name" they usually >> mean what >> we call "user login ID", so that would be more confusing. >> >> -David >> >> >> >> On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >> displayUserName ? >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> From: "Andrew Zeneski" <[hidden email]> >>> >>>> Our Crowd server uses displayName (as well as sn, givenName and >>>> mail) >>>> but that is probably because it is backed by LDAP. Display name >>>> gets auto >>>> populated with First/Last name, but is editable. >>>> userName sounds too much like a string to use for login, where >>>> displayName would mean the name to display in the system. If we >>>> add this >>>> field, we should edit createPersonAndUserLogin server to set the >>>> value to >>>> First/Last if its empty as well. Then use this field in the >>>> header instead >>>> of the party fields. >>>> Andrew >>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>> >>>>> That seems a good reason, what is used in Crowd ? I suggested >>>>> userName >>>>> because it's related to userLogin. What about displayUserName ? >>>>> >>>>> Jacques >>>>> >>>>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>>>> >>>>>> displayName is used in LDAP? Sweet! In that case... >>>>>> +1 for displayName >>>>>> -Adrian >>>>>> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email] >>>>>> > >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> From: Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email]> >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity >>>>>>> To: [hidden email] >>>>>>> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 10:59 PM >>>>>>> displayName is a common field used in LDAP systems. Which is >>>>>>> really the only reason I suggested it. Usually its the >>>>>>> first/last name together but its totally arbitrary. >>>>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 1:55 AM, awdesh parihar wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>> +1 for name suggested by jacques , we can also go we >>>>>>> displayUserName. >>>>>>>> ---- >>>>>>>> Awdesh Parihar >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> |
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
What if we name it... ok, I am joking :-)
I will go with "displayName" Jacopo On May 1, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Scott Gray wrote: > I can't believe we're still having this discussion :-) > +1 for displayName > > Regards > Scott > > HotWax Media > http://www.hotwaxmedia.com > > On 1/05/2009, at 8:59 PM, Rishi Solanki wrote: > >> Whenever we use userName or something like that (displayUserName) >> will >> definitely create confusions with userLoginId. >> As I stated before username parameter is mapped to userLoginId at >> many >> places in ofbiz. >> +1 for displayName. >> >> -- Rishi Solanki >> Enterprise Software Developer >> HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd. >> >> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 2:52 AM, David E Jones >> <[hidden email]>wrote: >> >>> >>> Yeah, if we have two alternatives that might be confusing, why not >>> combine >>> them and create a frankenstein option that will _definitely_ be >>> confusing! >>> ;) >>> >>> I'm for displayName... when people say "user name" they usually >>> mean what >>> we call "user login ID", so that would be more confusing. >>> >>> -David >>> >>> >>> >>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>> >>> displayUserName ? >>>> >>>> Jacques >>>> >>>> From: "Andrew Zeneski" <[hidden email]> >>>> >>>>> Our Crowd server uses displayName (as well as sn, givenName and >>>>> mail) >>>>> but that is probably because it is backed by LDAP. Display name >>>>> gets auto >>>>> populated with First/Last name, but is editable. >>>>> userName sounds too much like a string to use for login, where >>>>> displayName would mean the name to display in the system. If we >>>>> add this >>>>> field, we should edit createPersonAndUserLogin server to set >>>>> the value to >>>>> First/Last if its empty as well. Then use this field in the >>>>> header instead >>>>> of the party fields. >>>>> Andrew >>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> That seems a good reason, what is used in Crowd ? I suggested >>>>>> userName >>>>>> because it's related to userLogin. What about displayUserName ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> displayName is used in LDAP? Sweet! In that case... >>>>>>> +1 for displayName >>>>>>> -Adrian >>>>>>> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email] >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin >>>>>>>> entity >>>>>>>> To: [hidden email] >>>>>>>> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 10:59 PM >>>>>>>> displayName is a common field used in LDAP systems. Which is >>>>>>>> really the only reason I suggested it. Usually its the >>>>>>>> first/last name together but its totally arbitrary. >>>>>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 1:55 AM, awdesh parihar wrote: >>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>> +1 for name suggested by jacques , we can also go we >>>>>>>> displayUserName. >>>>>>>>> ---- >>>>>>>>> Awdesh Parihar >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> > |
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
Administrator
|
Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity
|
|
Suggestions are always welcome Jacques, I was just joking around :-)
Regards Scott HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com On 1/05/2009, at 10:27 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > It was just suggestions, +1 for displayName; with all arguments this > name has in its favor > > Jacques > > From: "Jacopo Cappellato" <[hidden email]> > : <[hidden email]> > Sent: Friday, May 01, 2009 11:26 AM > Subject: Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin entity > > >> What if we name it... ok, I am joking :-) >> I will go with "displayName" >> Jacopo >> On May 1, 2009, at 11:21 AM, Scott Gray wrote: >>> I can't believe we're still having this discussion :-) >>> +1 for displayName >>> >>> Regards >>> Scott >>> >>> HotWax Media >>> http://www.hotwaxmedia.com >>> >>> On 1/05/2009, at 8:59 PM, Rishi Solanki wrote: >>> >>>> Whenever we use userName or something like that >>>> (displayUserName) will >>>> definitely create confusions with userLoginId. >>>> As I stated before username parameter is mapped to userLoginId >>>> at many >>>> places in ofbiz. >>>> +1 for displayName. >>>> >>>> -- Rishi Solanki >>>> Enterprise Software Developer >>>> HotWax Media Pvt. Ltd. >>>> >>>> On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 2:52 AM, David E Jones >>>> <[hidden email]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, if we have two alternatives that might be confusing, why >>>>> not combine >>>>> them and create a frankenstein option that will _definitely_ be >>>>> confusing! >>>>> ;) >>>>> >>>>> I'm for displayName... when people say "user name" they usually >>>>> mean what >>>>> we call "user login ID", so that would be more confusing. >>>>> >>>>> -David >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 2:03 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>> >>>>> displayUserName ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Jacques >>>>>> >>>>>> From: "Andrew Zeneski" <[hidden email]> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Our Crowd server uses displayName (as well as sn, givenName >>>>>>> and mail) >>>>>>> but that is probably because it is backed by LDAP. Display >>>>>>> name gets auto >>>>>>> populated with First/Last name, but is editable. >>>>>>> userName sounds too much like a string to use for login, where >>>>>>> displayName would mean the name to display in the system. If >>>>>>> we add this >>>>>>> field, we should edit createPersonAndUserLogin server to set >>>>>>> the value to >>>>>>> First/Last if its empty as well. Then use this field in the >>>>>>> header instead >>>>>>> of the party fields. >>>>>>> Andrew >>>>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 3:20 AM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> That seems a good reason, what is used in Crowd ? I >>>>>>>> suggested userName >>>>>>>> because it's related to userLogin. What about >>>>>>>> displayUserName ? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Jacques >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> From: "Adrian Crum" <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> displayName is used in LDAP? Sweet! In that case... >>>>>>>>> +1 for displayName >>>>>>>>> -Adrian >>>>>>>>> --- On Wed, 4/29/09, Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email] >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> From: Andrew Zeneski <[hidden email]> >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: Adding description field(s) to the UserLogin >>>>>>>>>> entity >>>>>>>>>> To: [hidden email] >>>>>>>>>> Date: Wednesday, April 29, 2009, 10:59 PM >>>>>>>>>> displayName is a common field used in LDAP systems. Which is >>>>>>>>>> really the only reason I suggested it. Usually its the >>>>>>>>>> first/last name together but its totally arbitrary. >>>>>>>>>> On Apr 30, 2009, at 1:55 AM, awdesh parihar wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> Hi >>>>>>>>>>>> +1 for name suggested by jacques , we can also go we >>>>>>>>>> displayUserName. >>>>>>>>>>> ---- >>>>>>>>>>> Awdesh Parihar >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > |
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |