ASP.Net Membersip Framework

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul
  • Start date Start date
P

Paul

Whould you recommend to still use the ASP.Net 2.0 Membership Framework to
manage user accounts, etc. today with ASP.Net 3.5?

Are there better alternatives today?

TIA
 
The "membership framework" may have been introduced in version 2.0, but as
far as I'm concerned a more accurate description is the .NET membership
framework. In short, this is the membership functionality included in .NET.

Like most things in ASP.NET, there's no reason not to use this functional
unless you need more customized functionality and don't mind writing it from
scratch.
 
Paul said:
Whould you recommend to still use the ASP.Net 2.0 Membership Framework to
manage user accounts, etc. today with ASP.Net 3.5?
Click to expand...

3.5 sits on top of 2.0, so it is still the same bits you would use. I am
okay with the membership bits, although I find myself creating custom
providers, as the default implementation is a bit clunky for what I do. It
is a great out of the box solution for small sites where the user
effectively controls their own password (and can use the "send me my
password" feature to change it if they forget). If you have a customer
service person that can change things, it gets rather unwieldy. Fortunately,
you can easily create custom providers.

I don't like the default Profile bits at all.

--
Peace and Grace,
Greg

Twitter: @gbworld
Blog: http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com

************************************************
| Think outside the box! |
************************************************
 
Agreed, we have to use the Profile Table Provider Scotty released --after--
tacitly conceding what he allowed to go live in the first place was gfs and
still, using the Table Provider does not generate nor use a normalized
schema so Membership remains very useful regardless.
 
Hillbilly said:
Agreed, we have to use the Profile Table Provider Scotty
released --after-- tacitly conceding what he allowed to go live in the
first place was gfs and still, using the Table Provider does not generate
nor use a normalized schema so Membership remains very useful regardless.
Click to expand...

I will have to look at his implementation. I created my own from scratch,
along with a derived class for other membership bits so I could circumvent
the very narrow box Microsoft provides with Membership.'

I am thankful they had the foresight to include a provider model so I did
not have to write everything.

--
Peace and Grace,
Greg

Twitter: @gbworld
Blog: http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com

************************************************
| Think outside the box! |
************************************************
 
Back
Top