Ryan Lane wrote:
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Jon Davis w...@konsoletek.com wrote:
I could see some real use cases for OAuth. Especially with regards to the
cases mentioned above. People could potentially build apps like AWB and
Huggle using OAuth. In general I think this would be a
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 8:08 PM, Jon Davis w...@konsoletek.com wrote:
As for being an OpenID provider... only one major thought: Having this
Foundation be a provider would be a lot of additional server load (It is
100% non-cacheable) without any benefit to the main goal of providing free
I imagine the load wouldn't be a big deal. An OpenID server is pretty
simple, no?
Yeah. I couldn't imagine it adding much load.
I've done several OpenID client implementations; so watching the
conversation with the server, it seems like there's no overhead at all
beyond a normal login
Here's the last post I could find on the subject:
For my part, I'm firmly against joining the provider but not
consumer camp. It's of no benefit to anyone . . .
I just thought of a great benefit, however. Consider this true
scenario: I want to write a MediaWiki API client for editors;
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Robb Shecter r...@weblaws.org wrote:
Here's the last post I could find on the subject:
For my part, I'm firmly against joining the provider but not
consumer camp. It's of no benefit to anyone . . .
Not totally sure who wrote that. It may have been a while
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 37-01--10 03:59 PM, Robb Shecter wrote:
But there's one problem: people would need to log in to Wikipedia
*through my app*. They'd have to enter their username and password to
my app, which would turn around an authenticate via the MediaWiki
I could see some real use cases for OAuth. Especially with regards to the
cases mentioned above. People could potentially build apps like AWB and
Huggle using OAuth. In general I think this would be a cool thing to have
for all MediaWiki installs.
As for being an OpenID provider... only one
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 7:08 PM, Jon Davis w...@konsoletek.com wrote:
I could see some real use cases for OAuth. Especially with regards to the
cases mentioned above. People could potentially build apps like AWB and
Huggle using OAuth. In general I think this would be a cool thing to have
Robb Shecter wrote:
Consider this true
scenario: I want to write a MediaWiki API client for editors;
something like the Wordpress Dashboard. Really give editors a modern
web experience. I'd want to do this as a Rails app: I could build it
quickly and find lots of collaborators via
Not to derail the open-id idea I think we should support oAuth 100%
and it certainly would help with persistent applications and scalability...
I don't think that's a derail at all. I don't know OAuth that well, but it
seems to provide the same benefits of OpenID Provider.
Now... going to
Not to derail the open-id idea I think we should support oAuth 100%
and it certainly would help with persistent applications and scalability...
But ...for the most part you can build these types of applications in
pure javascript. Anytime you need to run an api action that requires
you to
On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:11 AM, Robb Shecter r...@weblaws.org wrote:
Not to derail the open-id idea I think we should support oAuth 100%
and it certainly would help with persistent applications and scalability...
I don't think that's a derail at all. I don't know OAuth that well, but it
12 matches
Mail list logo
