Hola, The question I have is - and please take in consideration today I'm an outdated OAuth guy :) - : how hard is putting 1.0a support in current 2.0 client? TIA, Simo
http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ http://twitter.com/simonetripodi http://www.99soft.org/ On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Tommaso Teofili <[email protected]> wrote: > 2012/1/14 Antonio Sanso <[email protected]> > >> >> On Jan 12, 2012, at 5:04 PM, Simone Tripodi wrote: >> >> > Ciao Antonio, >> > >> >> >> >> unless I am doing something wrong it looks like I still do not have any >> write/edit permission on the wiki. >> >> >> > >> > I am worried you'll have to contact INFRA[1] >> > >> >> If I am not completely wrong some major sites (e.g. twitter) are still >> using version 1.0a of the spec. >> >> For this reason, if we want to gather any crowd to use Amber it would >> be good to support at least client side also version 1.0a otherwise people >> would be oriented to use some other Java libraries (e.g. Scribe). >> >> The effort to do it for the client module should not be to huge, but >> there is obviously an overhead. >> > >> > That sounds a more than valid reason to implement 1.0a - can you make >> > a quick search to verify that please? TIA! >> >> Hi Simone, I can confirm Twitter is still using 1.0a . >> As a general consideration I also think that there are much more users >> interested to the client part than the one interested to the server part >> (like me :)). >> > > I agree that the client is an important part so I agree on the 1.0a > implementation. > > >> For this reason we could even think about a two phase release (first one >> we focus on the client/common modules) and second we focus on everything >> else. >> > > I think the best way of doing that is putting down a quick roadmap of > things to be done so that we can prioritize tasks and, eventually, split > those items in different phases. > BTW we are in the Incubator for a long time now so it'd be good to include > also a release / graduation plan. > > >> I hope you agree than one of our goal is to be mentioned here [0]and here >> [1] in order to increase the project exposure. >> >> WDYT? >> > > +1 > > Tommaso > > > >> >> Regards >> >> Antonio >> >> [0] http://oauth.net/code/ >> [1] http://oauth.net/2/ >> >> >> > >> > I would propose to add that implementation in the current 2.0 impl, >> > rather than continue developing old stuff... >> > >> > best, >> > -Simo >> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA >> > >> > http://people.apache.org/~simonetripodi/ >> > http://simonetripodi.livejournal.com/ >> > http://twitter.com/simonetripodi >> > http://www.99soft.org/ >> >>
