[pLog-svn] r6088 - plog/branches/lifetype-1.2/class/security

Jon Daley plogworld at jon.limedaley.com
Wed Jan 2 14:18:30 EST 2008

On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Andy wrote:
> I am concerned mostly with the API.  Using a public class that depends on
> a new method with-in new class, or changes to object structures that are
> returned.
> Could their be a version that could set the standard for structor, yet
> build on the API, keeping legacy systems usable?  This would be a project
> within itself, but would version 3 be a consideration for this?  Will 2.5
> objects be obtained with the same method and class data returned as a
> stable, and as usable in a production system, that a legacy 2.X would
> have?
 	Don't we already follow that model?  There are a number of 
functions that are deprecated according to the documentation, but still 
exist for years after release.

> I have no Lifetype PHP custom code.  I use you API in it's entirety.
 	Good.  I wouldn't expect any problems when upgrading between minor 
releases.  Have you had trouble before, or just fearing the worst?

> I am considering making a single change in ragards to seperate user 
> dependant tables in DB's, while mainting a private admin SQL database. 
> However, this is too minor of a source code change to be worried about 
> when considering upgrading versions.
 	I'd direct you towards writing your own userdata integration 
class, and not touch any of the core code.  Then you can use whatever 
tables you want.

More information about the pLog-svn mailing list