Products

Solutions

Resources

Partners

Community

Blog

About

QA

Ideas Test

New Community Website

Ordinarily, you'd be at the right spot, but we've recently launched a brand new community website... For the community, by the community.

Yay... Take Me to the Community!

Welcome to the DNN Community Forums, your preferred source of online community support for all things related to DNN.
In order to participate you must be a registered DNNizen

HomeHomeArchived Discus...Archived Discus...Developing Under Previous Versions of .NETDeveloping Under Previous Versions of .NETASP.Net 2.0ASP.Net 2.0Replacing the membership providerReplacing the membership provider
Previous
 
Next
New Post
3/1/2006 3:41 PM
 

Hey guys

 

I tried replacing the membership/profile/roles providers with my own implementations wich force DNN to use the same application name for every portal. It blew up in my face eventough DNN installed properly using my own providers. Can't login with super users, Admins can loggin but the app blows up as soon as you access a membership related page.

I noticed there is a httpmodule for issueing the cookies but after studing it, I didn't suspect it for breaking my code. Except for one line that made me suspicious. there is a line where the application name is set to a constant to check for superusers.

in terms of DNNmembership, I want every user that registers to be in the -1 application and every portal should lso use the -1 application for authentication.

 

Who has experience with replacing the membership provider in dotnetnuke and could point me to ALL the points of intrest in the DNN codebase where I would need to change the behavior???


Edit your Skin.xml and Container.xml files with:
Yannick's SXE
 
New Post
3/2/2006 8:43 AM
 

I've done some thinking and I suddenly I remembered that DNN reaaly needs 2 "applications" for membership

I am going to try inheriting from the DNN membership providers, override the Application name behavior.

if the application name is -1 we are looking for superusers so this should be allowed, every other portal should refer to the 0 application. I'll post the results later.

 

I think I failed to mention I code for DNN4.0.2, but this should have been obvious from the forum [EMO]bigsmile.gif[/EMO]


Edit your Skin.xml and Container.xml files with:
Yannick's SXE
 
New Post
3/2/2006 9:24 AM
 

Well, the application name is only needed when using the aspnet_ tables. THe application name itself is simply the objectQualifier and portalID together.

As I said before in other posts, I recommend holding off on this until next release. The current setup is limiting because of our original implementation. Until this is complete I think any custom provider will have some problems working properly. Although there is lots of things necessary to change to make all users avaliable to all portals.

 


Chris Paterra

Get direct answers to your questions in the Community Exchange.
 
New Post
3/2/2006 11:21 AM
 

"The current setup is limiting because of our original implementation. Until this is complete I think any custom provider will have some problems working properly. "

this isn't limiting, its just plain impossible to use a DNN portal as a slave for an other application. And the promise of being able to swap out providers with an other just doesn't work. the way it is done in DNN defeats the entire purpose of the membership abstraction.

 

On the other hand I made some progress in forcing every portal to use application 0 for membership.

Doh, it complains the role "Administrators" already exists when adding a new portal, and aborts operation. This leaves me with a half installed portal wich I can't even delete because DNN thinks the role administrators doen't exist even tough it exists in the membership application <= I consider this a bug

DNN memebrship should accept the fact that a role can already exist befor installing. It should also accept the fact that membership data can change without it being notified.

I know DNN4 has some compatibelity issues with DNN2, but when you trap a membership related error. DNN should check if it can't correct itself by re-syncronizing with ASP.NET membership before it decides to blow up the portal

 

What are you guys planning for the next release that will make my life easier?

Being able to specify the application name a portal should use would be nice.

Managing userpools and portals as seperate objects and being able to link a new portal to any existing userpool would be even nicer. (this could easily simulate the current behavior of 1 userpool / portal)

 


Edit your Skin.xml and Container.xml files with:
Yannick's SXE
 
Previous
 
Next
HomeHomeArchived Discus...Archived Discus...Developing Under Previous Versions of .NETDeveloping Under Previous Versions of .NETASP.Net 2.0ASP.Net 2.0Replacing the membership providerReplacing the membership provider


These Forums are dedicated to discussion of DNN Platform and Evoq Solutions.

For the benefit of the community and to protect the integrity of the ecosystem, please observe the following posting guidelines:

  1. No Advertising. This includes promotion of commercial and non-commercial products or services which are not directly related to DNN.
  2. No vendor trolling / poaching. If someone posts about a vendor issue, allow the vendor or other customers to respond. Any post that looks like trolling / poaching will be removed.
  3. Discussion or promotion of DNN Platform product releases under a different brand name are strictly prohibited.
  4. No Flaming or Trolling.
  5. No Profanity, Racism, or Prejudice.
  6. Site Moderators have the final word on approving / removing a thread or post or comment.
  7. English language posting only, please.
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out
What is Liquid Content?
Find Out