Accounts module: beta testers needed

32 views
Skip to first unread message

Darren Burgess

unread,
Aug 23, 2014, 11:04:53 AM8/23/14
to modular-...@googlegroups.com
I have released a beta of version 2.0 of the Accounts module.  Would someone be interested in doing a beta test of my integration instructions?

Do to the nature of account management in FileMaker, integration is fairly involved.

I am hoping to get the documentation to the point that an average developer can handle the process, and I just need a second set of eyes on it.

The module file and docs are on GitHub:

Darren

Daniel Smith

unread,
Aug 28, 2014, 1:14:31 PM8/28/14
to modular-...@googlegroups.com
Here are my observations/suggestions:
  • Is there a reason this module cannot be used as a stand-alone file? I realize some users will want to copy the Accounts table to their data file, but installation would be much easier if they didn't have to. An example of this is PluginManager; I've set it up to only be used as a stand-alone/external file. The PluginChecker module is copied into any file that wants to use plugins, but I did not include instructions on installing PluginManager in a users file.
  • this module is split into two groups: all files/master file only. Perhaps these should be separate modules? I think it would make installation a little easier.
  • 'Accounts: ValidatePrivilegeSet ( privilegeSet )' script is bit by the Script Result bug recently being discussed in this group; if script parameters are not parsed the script result is empty.
  • 'Accounts: ValidatePrivilegeSet ( privilegeSet )' script's "copy block" can be simplified if you move the error trapping/set error capture outside of the if statement like:Inline image 1
  • all the scripts in folder 'Accounts: Public - Master File Only' could potentially be simplified by not evaluating the parameter, testing for error, or displaying an error. If you modify these scripts to never return a script result and exit the script immediately after an error occurs, then the called/calling scripts would be responsible for parameter parsing/error trapping. I don't know for sure this would work in this scenario, but if it could, then these scripts would look less cluttered and "scary" to developers when they are configuring the module.
FYI: many of the above issues/suggestions apply to multiple scripts, even though I only mentioned a particular script.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Modular FileMaker" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to modular-filema...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to modular-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/modular-filemaker.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/modular-filemaker/ba02d24f-c626-45b1-8001-95928b17a8da%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages