Last post Jan 14, 2006 05:40 PM by kkojak
Feb 24, 2004 04:25 PM|braiii|LINK
Feb 24, 2004 06:09 PM|smartsource-it|LINK
Feb 24, 2004 06:21 PM|cathal|LINK
Feb 24, 2004 09:23 PM|kkojak|LINK
Feb 24, 2004 09:53 PM|braiii|LINK
Feb 24, 2004 11:39 PM|sbwalker|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 02:57 AM|sleiman|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 09:12 AM|mathisjay|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 09:14 AM|smartsource-it|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 11:46 AM|cathope|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 12:04 PM|sbwalker|LINK
Feb 25, 2004 01:28 PM|iamnomad|LINK
Feb 26, 2004 03:51 AM|braiii|LINK
Feb 26, 2004 05:13 AM|sabine|LINK
Feb 26, 2004 06:51 PM|jcl5378|LINK
Mar 10, 2004 09:08 AM|cathope|LINK
Mar 10, 2004 10:41 AM|mathisjay|LINK
Mar 10, 2004 12:13 PM|cathope|LINK
Mar 10, 2004 12:15 PM|cathope|LINK
Mar 11, 2004 09:00 PM|jcl5378|LINK
Mar 16, 2004 04:28 AM|cathope|LINK
Mar 16, 2004 08:36 AM|phabyn|LINK
Mar 16, 2004 11:52 PM|lightbulb|LINK
Mar 27, 2004 01:38 AM|grandOPUS|LINK
Mar 27, 2004 11:34 AM|kkojak|LINK
Mar 27, 2004 11:51 AM|mrswoop|LINK
Mar 27, 2004 12:22 PM|kkojak|LINK
Mar 27, 2004 03:20 PM|grandOPUS|LINK
Nov 12, 2004 04:03 PM|oddible|LINK
Nov 12, 2004 04:31 PM|kkojak|LINK
Feb 07, 2005 08:47 AM|aulia.com|LINK
Feb 07, 2005 12:35 PM|rlyda|LINK
Aug 10, 2005 01:23 AM|rfurdzik|LINK
What stored procedure exactly? I have modifid GetUser, it still asks me to login to Child portal...
Aug 10, 2005 01:25 AM|rfurdzik|LINK
Aug 11, 2005 03:19 PM|rfurdzik|LINK
Below are all the changes I have made to SQL, however user from Main portal is still invisible in the Child Portal
1) 'NEED TO ADD records to table DNN_User_roles, when new user is created
userid=15 (from DNN_users table)
Role_id=6 (from DNN_roles table, each role set is unique for each portal, so there can be two admin groups)
add user_roles: UId=15, Role_ID=6
Each portal has different set of roles
2) Create record in DNN_User_portals, to associate user with portal:
add user_roles: UId=15, Portal_ID=2
3) Changes to stored procedures: DNN_GetUser, DNN_GetUserByName:
CREATE procedure dbo.DNN_GetUser
'FullName' = U.FirstName + ' ' + U.LastName,
from DNN_Users U
where U.UserId = @UserId
a) left outer join DNN_UserPortals UP On U.UserId = UP.UserId
b) and (UP.PortalId = @PortalId or U.IsSuperUser = 1)
Jan 11, 2006 03:24 PM|kennsterdude|LINK
I think the discussion about the CommunityZero concept is good... the concept of relating portals is certainly missing in the current product. This adds better granularity than the host/portal ideas I outlined above. I will add this to the Roadmap for inclusion
in a future version ( the scope for 2.1 will be posted following March 6 Beta 2 release )
What is going on with Single User Base? From what I have gathered from the numerous threads, etc, I have read on this, DNN still prevents users from having the same email address (or is it User ID) on different portals. It would be great to get some resolution
to this, I am pretty sure half the user base has a need to host a company's public site, and have at least one private site for that company.
Other uses include schools/universities which may need to have hundreds of sub-portals (utep.edu is one such institution) and more. I realize this is a huge problem, but apparently the core team realized, even touted a single user base was a popular 'use
case' for DotNetNuke.
Jan 11, 2006 10:25 PM|lou|LINK
Jan 13, 2006 08:01 PM|rfurdzik|LINK
Jan 13, 2006 08:37 PM|kennsterdude|LINK
There should be a way to specify in the Portal Setup if it belongs to the Group. The group would have the same user base. This would satisfy all users. If you do not want the same login on different portal, you would not add it to the Portal Group, that is
all. Why is it so difficult to implement??? It seems that this is the most wanted feature in DNN at this moment.
I gotta put it to you... I never got this idea until you put it in so few words. It makes perfect sense! This way, one portal/customer could have a single portal, the next customer could have a public & private facing portal, etc... wow... if only it were
so :( .
Jan 13, 2006 08:50 PM|thecrispy1|LINK
Being this is not the normal use case, it requires you to write your own membership and roles providers. We are working on making this process easier but a setup like this will require you still to write your own custom providers.
Jan 14, 2006 12:01 AM|rfurdzik|LINK
<< Being this is not the normal use case
And can I ask how do you know that ? Is this based on some kind of user polls? I bet if you ask people around you would find out there is so much need for this feature. Just see the post above: educational websites, corporate websites etc.
Jan 14, 2006 12:03 AM|rfurdzik|LINK
Jan 14, 2006 12:25 AM|kkojak|LINK
The problem is there are no good alternatives, I have tried two modules with big disapointment...One I got my money back, another refused to admit the problems existed at all (DNN Masters)....
I do not know why you are doing that, but you are lying.
The module works as advertised and the best proof of that are hunderts of satisfied users.
If you had bothered to check Patches & Fixes on Snowcovered, you would see that we keep current with every DNN version.
And if you had read the instructions, you would be able to set it up properly.
By the way, what we call Shared Area is exactly the same as what you call Portal Group and it works in excatly the way that you described.
We also offer another module that allows you to share users between remote portals -
DNNMasters Remote User Sharing
So there is readily available solution for most use cases.
The DNNMasters Multi Portal User Sharing module can be tested in real life scenario on
http://mms.dnnmasters.com so it's rather easy to find out if it works or not. And it definitely does!
Jan 14, 2006 03:09 AM|thecrispy1|LINK
You most certainly can ask. DotNetNuke takes in feedback in numerous ways. newsletter polls, forum feedback, email feedback, on site surveys (it's been awhile for this one), phone conversations and others. You can also consider the core team members like
'representatives' for the community. Several of the team's members are business owners and/or provide consultation/development to bigger organizations which also ads valuable insight.
That being said, the feedback on these forums only represents a small percentage of DotNetNuke users and developers. There are several posts on these forums which talk about this.
I am by no means saying your idea is not a good one. What I am saying is that we do listen to feedback. I am also saying that decisions are made to continue to support the highest percentage of the use cases and add additional use cases when the resources
are available. I know this has been said before, but DotNetNuke is a web application framework. It gives you the ability to swap things in/out to cater to a specific use case. In a field like this one, nothing is a "one size fits all" solution. What should
be considered the greatest asset of using this web application framework is that in this situation where a specific use case is not met, a small development effort can be put forth and you can achieved your desired end result and still support core/module
If you feel this strongly that this is a much used yet overlooked use case, please submit a use case document to me via email and I will definately read it over. I can promise nothing more than I will read it over. The end result depends on your document,
further community support supporting this use case and of course conversations with the rest of the core team.
Jan 14, 2006 12:49 PM|rfurdzik|LINK
No it does not work, and this guy's approach is very unprofessional. He never tried to resolve any issues and work it out. Just put a blame on teh customer, while his module had problems. He was asking me to wait for programmer at first who went misssing
after mariage :) After that he started to insult me... Never saw company behaving this way... Very unprofessional.... I want to see those hundreads of those customers he mentioned, he is the one who is a liar... My advice, stay away from this guy.
Jan 14, 2006 12:50 PM|rfurdzik|LINK
Jan 14, 2006 03:10 PM|thecrispy1|LINK
Jan 14, 2006 05:40 PM|kkojak|LINK
Developers make mistakes, bugs in software happen and I'm not denying any of ours.
Rafał, if you have any problems with the module, please make sure that you run the latest version and if there still is a problem, please open Help Ticket on
www.snowcovered.com or report the problem on our support forum at
I cannot possibly resolve any issues I'm not aware of.
All issues that were reported up to date were resolved promptly and as of today no known issues are open.
Returning to meritum - the Core Team caters for the mainstream and gives us an excellent framework to work with.
Many developers work to enhance the core and to add features for particular use cases.
We also try to do that and if there are any features that should be added to the module I'm open for suggestions.
We had requests for adding options to share only accounts belonging to a certain role - for exapmple Administrators, Content Managers, etc. That will be done soon.
Another one that some clients requested is an option to turn on/off sharing of roles.
Please let me know if anything else is needed.