search

mariposacoop / coopter

A co-op management system
3 stars 0 forks source link

User management module #2

Open gsf opened 12 years ago

gsf commented 12 years ago

Find or build a user management module. It should hold users, their profiles, groups, and permissions.

gsf commented 10 years ago

@hackmastera @krubokrubo @mdb @tmmagee This is what I believe we were discussing today for the "membership" module. I'd like to create a repo for the project, but what shall we call it? I believe "dis-member" and "memberry-blast" were suggested.

hackartisan commented 10 years ago

Cooperater On Dec 15, 2013 10:09 PM, "Gabriel Farrell" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hackmastera https://github.com/hackmastera @krubokrubohttps://github.com/krubokrubo @mdb https://github.com/mdb @tmmagee https://github.com/tmmagee This is what I believe we were discussing today for the "membership" module. I'd like to create a repo for the project, but what shall we call it? I believe "dis-member" and "memberry-blast" were suggested.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/mariposacoop/coopter/issues/2#issuecomment-30631201 .

hackartisan commented 10 years ago

it is user management but I think it is more than that because it's member management.

in django mess what do we have? user, member, and account? I think we need to figure out the boundaries of this module before we can name it. yesterday we discussed the sense that separating user from member had been a choice that didn't serve us well. On Dec 15, 2013 10:09 PM, "Gabriel Farrell" notifications@github.com wrote:

@hackmastera https://github.com/hackmastera @krubokrubohttps://github.com/krubokrubo @mdb https://github.com/mdb @tmmagee https://github.com/tmmagee This is what I believe we were discussing today for the "membership" module. I'd like to create a repo for the project, but what shall we call it? I believe "dis-member" and "memberry-blast" were suggested.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/mariposacoop/coopter/issues/2#issuecomment-30631201 .

mdb commented 10 years ago

I'm not too opinionated about its name. Plus, we can always change it as our conception and understanding evolve, right?

Of all suggested, I like dismember and cooperator the best.

tmmagee commented 10 years ago

Some thoughts:

Most co-ops don't have the notions of accounts. If we want to make something usable by other co-ops, we should make sure accounts are an add-on or a separate app.

Also, a lot of co-ops and non-profits use CiviCRM for their membership databases. I know CiviCRM is not a one-to-one analog for what we are trying to do, but I think it is worth the MIST's team to take a look at it to see what we can learn. They also use separate apps (in the form of separate Drupal or WordPress plugins) for different components (members, events, etc.).

Also I think CiviCRM is a good example of an app that is successful specifically because it was designed to integrate with popular CMSes (Drupal and WordPress in particular). And that is personally what I hope MESS is capable of doing someday.

NOTE: I have never actually used CiviCRM myself.

tmmagee commented 10 years ago

Also I like cooperator(s) or co-operator(s) for the name. Although now that I look at it co-operator looks like something else. So cooperator for me. Although if this ever becomes something flexible that can be used for organizations beyond co-ops I think we will have to change the name but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

gsf commented 10 years ago

I like "cooperator" too! The Wikipedia disambiguation page even has "a cooperative member" as a definition. And if it's only useful for coops, that's probably a good thing for limiting scope.

Also agreed that accounts will have to be optional or something that can be turned off. It will probably make sense to wrap accounts into some kind of more generic "group" functionality.

CiviCRM is an interesting example of software in use in the field. It does an impressive job of bundling a bunch of functionality together while supporting integration with Drupal, Joomla, and WordPress. I can definitely see its benefit to coops.

As a developer, however, I wouldn't want to build CiviCRM. I'm far more a fan of small apps with narrow feature sets. It's worth asking ourselves how cooperator would be different from CiviCRM, and if there are other tools we can build that will fill gaps where good technology is missing.