.Net 2.0 internal debate - looking for opinions

[Geoff Pennington]

We are using the Membership services and the SQL Membership provider that
comes with .Net 2.0. We have no problems but we have added our own tblRoles
table to go with the aspnet_Roles table that Microsoft provides. tblRoles
has extra information not in aspnet_Roles. There is, and always should be, a
1:1 correspondence between the two tables.

One of our team members wants to modify aspnet_Roles to contain the extra
information, because one table is cleaner than two. I am afraid of breaking
something if we go modifying Microsoft's tables. Maybe everything would be
fine today but some patch might screw things up unexpectedly.

Maybe even adding the table - and some stored procedures - is risky and we
should create our own provider. I'm not sure how hard that would be.

What do ya'll think?

Much obliged.

 

[MikeS]

I think Roles are part of Role manager, not Membership.

Maybe see -A from aspnet_regsql /?.

You might easily create a new rolemanager that inherits from the sql
provider and override the methods you see fit to pull from mybase as
well as your own storage. Then you can also cast the Roles.Provider to
your own type to get at any methods you added.

 

[Dominick Baier [DevelopMentor]]

Hi,

Microsoft only guarantess that the views and stored procedures will be stable
in future releases. I wouldn't add my own stuff to aspnetdb.