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

[Jon Daley]

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.