Should the Manager class handle multiple drivers? about lock

[franzliedke]

I don't need it. Is there an exact use case?

[driesvints]

I don't need it. Is there an exact use case?

A use case could be local development. Where you'd easily could use the production driver with a DB implementation to your production DB to check permissions for your production environment but with a read only driver so you'd never edit your production settings. This is of course mostly for persistent drivers. Doesn't really makes sense for static drivers.

I have to admit. This idea sounds far fetched with only a few use cases so I'm going to move this from the 1.0 milestone to a concept label and implement it in a future release if people ever need it.

[driesvints]

I think I found a valid use case. There could be some situations where you need both persistent and static drivers. I've found out in a large app that I'm maintaining I'm using both a persistent driver for user permissions on organizations and a static driver for the organization types. Will dig into this later to see if I can come up with something useful.

[sagikazarmark]

Hey, just found this package. Coming from sentry (crying for sentinel being open source) this one is the heaven itself.

To respond to this one as well: I think this belongs to a dependency container. Even when using multiple instances.

[driesvints]

@sagikazarmark Hey there! First of all, thanks for the nice words! :)

You're probably right about that. I guess the developer can always choose to bind as many Manager instances as he likes into some sort of container. Closing this.