Re: I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role provider
- From: "darrel" <notreal@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2007 09:35:00 -0600
I wonder why Microsoft just hadn't created one more abstraction layer
for the structure of 'users' table?
Like many of their products, they simply don't have to. They make things
'good enough to sell' but not necessarily 'good enough to use in a pragmatic
fashion'.
I think the membership provider thing is a great idea. I still don't get it.
Mainly because there's some fundamental concepts that I just haven't found a
comprehensive description of yet.
For now, I've reverted back to my own login system (which, admittedly, for
most of my sites, is all I really need) but hope to fight the Membership
Provider again some long weekend when I have nothing else to do.
-Darrel
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role providers
- From: alexandis
- RE: I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role provider
- From: Peter Bromberg [C# MVP]
- Re: I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role provider
- From: alexandis
- I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role providers
- Prev by Date: Session and Database Connection, Which Is More Costy?
- Next by Date: Re: using custom database for membership and rolls ?
- Previous by thread: Re: I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role provider
- Next by thread: Re: I feel it makes sense NOT to use custom membership & role provider
- Index(es):