.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 11:42 AM
> To: Demian Brecht
> Cc: comp.lang.pyt...@googlegroups.com; python-list@python.org
> Subject: Re: OAuth 2.0 implementation
>
> On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Demian Brecht
> wrote:
>> Supported provider list (with example
.tayl...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2012 11:42 AM
To: Demian Brecht
Cc: comp.lang.pyt...@googlegroups.com; python-list@python.org
Subject: Re: OAuth 2.0 implementation
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Demian Brecht
wrote:
> Supported provider list (with example code) is now:
> * Facebook
On Sat, Jul 7, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Demian Brecht wrote:
> Supported provider list (with example code) is now:
> * Facebook
> * Google
> * Foursquare
> * bitly
> * GitHub
> * StackExchange
> * Instagram
>
> Other providers may also be supported out of the box, but have been untested
> thus far.
Look
Supported provider list (with example code) is now:
* Facebook
* Google
* Foursquare
* bitly
* GitHub
* StackExchange
* Instagram
Other providers may also be supported out of the box, but have been untested
thus far.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 08:19:41 UTC-7, Alec Taylor wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Demian Brecht wrote:
> > FWIW, this package has undergone a major overhaul (474 LOC down to much
> > happier 66) and is available at https://github.com/demianbrecht/sanction.
> > Also available from P
On Fri, Jul 6, 2012 at 12:06 AM, Demian Brecht wrote:
> FWIW, this package has undergone a major overhaul (474 LOC down to much
> happier 66) and is available at https://github.com/demianbrecht/sanction.
> Also available from PyPI.
Thanks for this, I've now shared it on my favourite web-framewo
FWIW, this package has undergone a major overhaul (474 LOC down to much happier
66) and is available at https://github.com/demianbrecht/sanction. Also
available from PyPI.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On 28/03/2012 1:18 AM, Roy Smith wrote:
In article
<7909491.0.1332826232743.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbim5>,
Demian Brecht wrote:
OAuth 2.0 is still in draft status (draft 25 is the current one I believe)
and yes, unfortunately every single server available at this point have
varying d
On Tuesday, 27 March 2012 07:18:26 UTC-7, Roy Smith wrote:
> In article
> <7909491.0.1332826232743.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbim5>,
> Demian Brecht wrote:
>
> > OAuth 2.0 is still in draft status (draft 25 is the current one I believe)
> > and yes, unfortunately every single server avai
In article
<7909491.0.1332826232743.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@pbim5>,
Demian Brecht wrote:
> OAuth 2.0 is still in draft status (draft 25 is the current one I believe)
> and yes, unfortunately every single server available at this point have
> varying degrees of separation from the actua
at 10:11 AM, Ben Finney
> wrote:
>> Demian Brecht writes:
>>
>>> I'm getting close to an alpha release of an OAuth 2.0 implementation
>>> (https://github.com/demianbrecht/py-sanction).
>>
>> Thank you for doing this work.
>>
>> As s
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:11 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Demian Brecht writes:
>
>> I'm getting close to an alpha release of an OAuth 2.0 implementation
>> (https://github.com/demianbrecht/py-sanction).
>
> Thank you for doing this work.
>
> As someone who use
On Monday, 26 March 2012 21:24:35 UTC-7, Ben Finney wrote:
> Roy Smith writes:
>
> > In article <878vimhfdp@benfinney.id.au>,
> > Ben Finney wrote:
> > > So, if I want to be free to choose an identity provider I trust, and
> > > it's not Facebook or Google or Twitter or other privacy-hosti
On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 12:24 AM, Ben Finney wrote:
> Roy Smith writes:
>
>> In article <878vimhfdp@benfinney.id.au>,
>> Ben Finney wrote:
>> > So, if I want to be free to choose an identity provider I trust, and
>> > it's not Facebook or Google or Twitter or other privacy-hostile
>> > serv
Roy Smith writes:
> In article <878vimhfdp@benfinney.id.au>,
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > So, if I want to be free to choose an identity provider I trust, and
> > it's not Facebook or Google or Twitter or other privacy-hostile
> > services, how does OAuth help me do that?
>
> It doesn't. Well,
In article <878vimhfdp@benfinney.id.au>,
Ben Finney wrote:
> Roy Smith writes:
>
> > In article <87haxahh51@benfinney.id.au>,
> > Ben Finney wrote:
> > > As someone who uses OpenID, what can I read about why OAuth is better?
> >
> > OpenID is for people who worry about things like ho
Roy Smith writes:
> In article <87haxahh51@benfinney.id.au>,
> Ben Finney wrote:
> > As someone who uses OpenID, what can I read about why OAuth is better?
>
> OpenID is for people who worry about things like how OpenID is different
> from OAuth. Oauth is for people who have no idea what
In article <87haxahh51@benfinney.id.au>,
Ben Finney wrote:
> Demian Brecht writes:
>
> > I'm getting close to an alpha release of an OAuth 2.0 implementation
> > (https://github.com/demianbrecht/py-sanction).
>
> Thank you for doing this work.
>
&g
Demian Brecht writes:
> I'm getting close to an alpha release of an OAuth 2.0 implementation
> (https://github.com/demianbrecht/py-sanction).
Thank you for doing this work.
As someone who uses OpenID, what can I read about why OAuth is better?
Everything I read is targeted to
Hi all,
I'm getting close to an alpha release of an OAuth 2.0 implementation
(https://github.com/demianbrecht/py-sanction). High level features include:
* Support for multiple providers (protocol deviations). This didn't seem to be
supported by any library.
* Actually an
20 matches
Mail list logo
