I am writing an MVC 3 application and I am trying to implement my own custom membership provider (following the sample in Apress' Pro ASP.NET MVC 3 Framework).
I created my custom class, inherited from MembershipProvider and (using ReSharper) implemented all 27 of the methods with NotImplementedExceptions.
Now, I have overridden the ValidateUser method as the book states and it works fine, but I would like to make my provider more robust and implement the other methods (e.g. set MinRequiredPasswordLength and GetNumberOfUsersOnline).
Is there some sample code that I can use to start populating these methods that I can tweak to fit my own DB/Model schema?
I can certainly use trial and error to figure it out, but a base code sample would greatly help.
EDIT:
This question was just downvoted twice. If you are going to downvote, please post a comment as to why so that I can work on improving my questions.
EDIT 2:
For example, for the following method:
public override int GetNumberOfUsersOnline()
{
throw new System.NotImplementedException();
}
I can try to write code from scratch to look at some web log, determine the users login time and approximate if they are still on, but that will take a large amount of time for me to figure out. Since all this code is from the same interface that Microsoft wrote for the standard SqlMembershipProvider, isn't there code out there (even from MS) that contains this method? If so, I want take it, modify it so it uses my DB schema instead of the aspnetdb default schema. I would prefer to have some sort of base code to work from. I thought this would be a simple and fairly standard request, but perhaps not.
You can't use the default provider's code for your custom provider, that is why you are implementing a custom one, to tweak it according to your requirements, use your own db tables etc.
Take a look at my blog posts about custom membership, custom role providers and custom membership user. There is an example there of how you can use your own database to get/set membership information.
Here's a of sample implementation of custom MembershipProvider on MSDN.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/6tc47t75.aspx
Related
I have some plugin's which are basically input and output type definitions. I have a generic controller which i can add to the mvc pipeline. All works fine.
but I'm having trouble setting the api version on this generic controller. I know you can set this based upon an attribute on top of the controller class. But since you can't have this dynamic (attribute) don't allow it, i have no way to set the version for each instance of the generic controller.
Currently i just compile the controller for each instance on runtime and register i using the roslyn compiler.
is there a way to set the api-version somewhere in the pipeline of registering controllers in the mvc pipeline and endup with different api versions endpoints.
This can be achieved by using the Conventions API. It was designed to support this exact type of scenario:
https://github.com/microsoft/aspnet-api-versioning/wiki/API-Version-Conventions
This will only work on closed-generics, but it shouldn't be too much work to make that happen. Here's a couple of basic examples:
// typed, closed generic
options.Conventions.Controller<GenericController<PlugIn1>>().HasApiVersion(1,0);
// untyped, closed generic
var controllerType = typeof(GenericController<>).MakeGenericType(new []{typeof(PlugIn1)});
options.Conventions.Controller(controllerType).HasApiVersion(1,0);
You can also author your own custom conventions a la IControllerConvention. This approach could be used to version all controllers that inherit from GenericController<>. Then you just need to add it to the conventions like this:
options.Conventions.Add(new PlugInControllerConvention());
Hopefully that's enough to get you started. Feel free to ask more questions.
I'm new to Laravel & I wanted to know something about it's feature that calls Contracts.
(If my question not in place, let me know why, and don't just downvote it).
So from what I red in Laravel Documentation and say on Laracasts videos, I understood that contracts they are only interfaces for class implementation.
So what it's good for? That if I or someone else will implement those interfaces will all need to go by the interface and then I dont need to change my code at all?
Is that the reason why Laravel uses it's implementation as a contracts ?
Also I wanted to know, to achive the implementation I must bind the implementation to a contract?
Yes, I think your understanding is mostly correct. I will try to explain with an example. Let's say you have a PackageDeliveryServiceContract that has some methods like trackPackage, getShippingCost.
You create a FedexDeliveryService to adhere to the contract and implement those methods.
In your controller, you can just inject PackageDeliveryServiceContract and start using it right away. (are you familiar with laravel's dependency injection?).
Let's say later you decide you no longer want to ship with Fedex and use UPS instead. Then you can create UPSDeliveryService that also adheres to that contract.
Now, all you need to do is change your binding from FedexDeliveryService to UPSDeliveryService and you don't need to make any changes to your controller code.
Typically you will create the binding between contract and implementation inside a service provider such as app/Providers/AppServiceProvider.php
I am not using any of asp.net Authentication in my code. It is handled by an outside library. I get back a success or failure from the function. So all the work is done for me.sCould I get some examples of how I would implement this in MVC3. I know a little, I have had 2 weeks experience.
Thanks.
AuthFunction("UserName", "password");
You need to implement your own MembershipProvider. The ValidateUser method will use AuthFunction method from your library.
This tutorial should be good. Just skip the repository things because those are already implemented by your library. Carefully check the configuration section at the bottom of the tutorial.
Does anyone know if there is going to be created a default MembershipProvider to use with EF 5 (like SqlMembershipProvider and ActiveDirectoryMembershipProvider) or we will still have to create custom ones (that is for Code First of course)?
Actually after the long comments and explanations it results that there will be a default MembershipProvider for EF and - guess what, guess what - it is called EFMembershipProvider. Here is a link.Now this is really cool because third party implementations of MembershipProvider will no longer be needed (or the respective manual implementation - it was kind of BIG and total overkill for small projects).
UPDATE
Currently it seems that this provider is not available. I do not know if it will be developed and included in the future either.
Since we are encouraged to use SimpleMembershipProvider and migrations when using EF Code First that is what I am doing now. You can also implement the ExtendedMembershipProvider, which requires a little bit more effort.
For me the best solution for now is to inherit SimpleMembershipProvider and modify only the things that I need (I am using most of the code from my previous implementation of MembershipProvider), for example logging with email or username.
I've implemented a CodeFirst MembershipProvider & Role with my Silversite CMS ASP.NET library, that can be found at silversite.codeplex.com. The library also supports multiple DbContexts for CodeFirst databases.
As far as I know though currently the implementation is broken, and I didn't have the time to fix it yet. Also Profile and Session providers still are lacking. But I've got the code from the MySql providers that should not be too hard to port.
Is there a built in function which will test if an email address is valid?
I want to test the email address structure is valid before sending a confirmation email to the end user.
I understand i could create my own function easy enough with the use of a regular expression but if there is a built in function i would much rather use this.
You can do this with Data Annotations extensions I believe. Check out Scott Guthrie's blog post on it here: http://weblogs.asp.net/srkirkland/archive/2011/02/23/introducing-data-annotations-extensions.aspx.
There is a good point in Scott's post as to why you would use this rather than the MVC 3 Futures validators which might be relevant to your choice:
ASP.NET MVC 3 futures defines four new data annotations attributes which this project has as well: CreditCard, Email, Url and EqualTo. Unfortunately referencing MVC 3 futures necessitates taking an dependency on MVC 3 in your model layer, which may be unadvisable in a multi-tiered project. Data Annotations Extensions keeps the server and client side libraries separate so using the project’s validation attributes don’t require you to take any additional dependencies in your model layer which still allowing for the rich client validation experience if you are using MVC 3.
Yes, you can use
public class CustomerMetaData
{
// Add type information.
[DataType(DataType.EmailAddress)]
public object EmailAddress;
}
on your model. See more about it here.
however, last time I checked it does not work client sided.
I googled it, and from imran baloch's blog post it seems it does work now.