[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Nate Graham]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Nate Graham  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||n...@kde.org
  Component|Daemon  |general

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Mike]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Mike  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||kdeb...@tstacc.anonaddy.me

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[David Edmundson]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

David Edmundson  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags|Backport+, Brainstorm+, |Backport-
   |corner_case+, Usability+|
 CC||k...@davidedmundson.co.uk

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Иван Туманов]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Иван Туманов  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

  Flags||Backport+, Brainstorm+,
   ||corner_case+, Usability+
   Assignee|kde-telepathy-b...@kde.org  |tu4manj...@yandex.ru

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Иван Туманов]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

--- Comment #6 from Иван Туманов  ---
(In reply to Corentin Noël from comment #0)
> Hi there,
> I'm Corentin Noël, responsible of the Online Accounts integration at
> elementary.
> Since a few years now, we are using the GSignond daemon on elementary, a
> GLib-based alternative of the Signond daemon as we are not willing to
> introduce a Qt dependency on our system just for one daemon.
> Signond has been mainly developed by Canonical for Ubuntu, with the recent
> Unity events, the developers of Signond have been laid-off.
> 
> You seem to be the last desktop environment that still use Signond, and I
> think that it would be a better idea to switch to GSignond.
> The switch can be really easy for you, both are very compatible, you mainly
> just have to use the libgsignond library instead of libsignond on the
> daemon-plugins side, and use libgsignon-glib instead of libsignon-glib.
> 
> I'm open to changes on any side and would be very pleased to have more
> cooperation with you on Online Accounts integration.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Иван Туманов]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

--- Comment #7 from Иван Туманов  ---
(In reply to Martin Klapetek from comment #1)
> Hey Corentin,
> 
> thanks for getting in touch!
> 
> I think we're pretty much in the same boat but opposite
> streams - we'd prefer to keep using the Qt daemon and Qt
> libraries, rather. For us it's much easier to work with
> and also fix bugs in a Qt codebase, which is our primary
> language after all.
> 
> I agree that the Canonical situation is a very unfortunate
> one but given that the Qt daemon is working well for our
> needs, I don't really see the need to switch techs.
> 
> My understanding is that GSignond is not actually compatible
> with the Signond, is that correct? If that's the case, I would
> really wish that these two are brought together more closer,
> to be compatible and interchangeable. Then we could both keep
> our native daemons while having fully cross-desktop accounts.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Иван Туманов]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Иван Туманов  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||tu4manj...@yandex.ru

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Elvis Angelaccio]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Elvis Angelaccio  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC||elvis.angelac...@kde.org

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Corentin Noël]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

--- Comment #5 from Corentin Noël  ---
I'm `tintou` on #accounts-sso in freenode if you want to talk directly

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Corentin Noël]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

--- Comment #4 from Corentin Noël  ---
One other possibility is to have:
 * libgsignon : GLib library to integrate with a Signon daemon
 * libsignon : Qt library equivalent
Both talking to the same daemon (so that GLib apps and Qt apps can share the
credentials)

I don't know if you're using libsignon-glib right now, I've seen a libsignon-qt
but can't locale the source anywhere and it's not referenced in your wiki too.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Martin Klapetek]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

--- Comment #3 from Martin Klapetek  ---
> It would be great to be able to move toward a common D-Bus API though.

I'd be happy to try and help out with that (though my time is
quite limited).

We can't really get rid of the Qt libs though because we need
a Qt layer on top to be able to use it in a sensible way from
our KDE/Qt apps.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Corentin Noël]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Corentin Noël  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|RESOLVED|UNCONFIRMED
 Resolution|WONTFIX |---

--- Comment #2 from Corentin Noël  ---
Of course that's another possibility, as the libsignon library is talking to
the daemon with D-Bus it should be possible to have two existing Daemons (Qt
and GLib).
>From what I've heard the two projects have diverged regarding this D-Bus API
and thus are not really interchangeable right now. It would be great to be able
to move toward a common D-Bus API though. My main reasoning was to reduce the
amount of duplicate effort, so it's also possible to just keep libsignon-glib
but try to make the two daemons compatible, this might require changes in both
sides but at least one library get removed (libgsignon-glib in this case).

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[KAccounts] [Bug 378814] Consider switching to the GSignond stack

[Martin Klapetek]

https://bugs.kde.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378814

Martin Klapetek  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|UNCONFIRMED |RESOLVED
 CC||mklape...@kde.org
 Resolution|--- |WONTFIX

--- Comment #1 from Martin Klapetek  ---
Hey Corentin,

thanks for getting in touch!

I think we're pretty much in the same boat but opposite
streams - we'd prefer to keep using the Qt daemon and Qt
libraries, rather. For us it's much easier to work with
and also fix bugs in a Qt codebase, which is our primary
language after all.

I agree that the Canonical situation is a very unfortunate
one but given that the Qt daemon is working well for our
needs, I don't really see the need to switch techs.

My understanding is that GSignond is not actually compatible
with the Signond, is that correct? If that's the case, I would
really wish that these two are brought together more closer,
to be compatible and interchangeable. Then we could both keep
our native daemons while having fully cross-desktop accounts.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.