Motivation for Project

Topics: General Topic
Developer
Jan 4, 2012 at 10:01 PM
Edited Jan 5, 2012 at 8:03 PM

I've been trying to "read between the lines" about the original (and/or current) motivation for the project.

Was this written:

1.  An adapter for Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan).  Where the methods in the NetSqlAzMan just passes calls to (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan)), but perhaps with nicer/cleaner methods?

2.  A replacement for (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan)).  Where (most or all of) the features available in (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan)) are recreated in NetSqlAzMan, but the code was developed independently.

3.  To provide more features than (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan)) provided.  Aka, a "smarter"/"better" version of (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan)).

4.  To rewrite but also keep a semi-dead project alive through open-source.  (As in, perhaps (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan))) is a dead or abandoned project by Microsoft).  (Perhaps to provide DotNet 4.0 support???)

5.  Other?

I am not asking to start unnecessary arguments or anything like that.  I like the object model of NetSqlAzMan.  But I need to defend any decision to use it to my project manager(s) and other developers.

And basically the question that came up is:  "What is the advantage of using NetSqlAzMan instead of (Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan))?"

And the sub question is "Is Windows Authorization Manager (AzMan) dead?".  (And Long Live NetSqlAzMan!).

 

Thanks in advance!!

 

Jan 5, 2012 at 7:51 PM

We have been using this product for a few years and it works very well for us.

I particularly like the flexibility to set permissions on role level, or task / operation level. And it integrates with our application seamlessly.

Don't go with AzMan. It's dead already.

Developer
Jan 5, 2012 at 8:42 PM
Edited Jan 5, 2012 at 8:42 PM
mikeliu88 wrote:

We have been using this product for a few years and it works very well for us.

I particularly like the flexibility to set permissions on role level, or task / operation level. And it integrates with our application seamlessly.

Don't go with AzMan. It's dead already.

Are you using it for a single application, or multiple applications in your organization?

Are you using the NetSqlAzMan object model directly, or translating (adapter pattern) into your own object model?

Do you know of anything concrete which notes that "AzMan is dead"?  It looks like just lack of development (from what I can see).
But that could mean "dead" or it could mean "Just really stable, no more need to work on it.".

 

Thanks.

Developer
Jan 5, 2012 at 9:53 PM

I've posted this question over at:

http://stackoverflow.com/questions/8750367/netsqlazman-vs-azman-vs

in hopes of more responses.