[ckan-dev] OpenID and the CKAN future

[Haq, Salman]

On 7/9/12 9:27 AM, "Rufus Pollock" <rufus.pollock at okfn.org> wrote:

>On 9 July 2012 13:39, Toby Dacre <toby.okfn at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Following on from Salman's OpenID bug post on the list and some irc
>>chatting
>> with Ross & Sean.
>>
>> Where do we want to go with this?  The last time I was involved in this
>> debate (a few months back) it sounded like we where definitely removing
>> support for openID and all that was preventing this was migrating users
>>to
>> 'normal' accounts.  If I recall correctly the openID stuff was a bit
>>broken
>> eg around google logins etc. but as it was being killed there was no
>> incentive to fix due to the complexity/time needed.
>>
>> As I see it we should either bite the bullet and kill openID or we
>>should
>> make it work nicely.
>
>I am a strong +1 on killing it.
>
>> Although personally I have never trusted OpenID, as I believe it is
>> phishable I can see it being of benefit to others and anything to
>>reduce the
>> number of logins in the cloud based crazyness of todays interweb has its
>> advantages.  So I can see it's value to people other than myself.  In a
>> previous life using app engine the google account tie-in sometimes made
>>life
>> simpler - although multiple google accounts do not seem to be supported
>> outside google/paid gmail - but that's another story.
>>
>> Anyhow if we do keep the openID stuff (and maybe even if we kill that)
>>We
>> should probably consider such evils as facebook/twitter integration -
>>again
>> being a believer in the asocial-web this is not for me but it could
>>well be
>> beneficial for those that enjoy such things and also is likely a much
>>larger
>> userbase than openID etc
>
>This is far more useful than OpenID. However, we can keep the
>discussions separate.
>
>> So what's the feelings of the ckan crew (and users) to this?  Do we
>>kill /
>> fix / extend?  There is also the whole repoze.who stuff to which I'd
>>really
>> like to remove if we can.
>
>I'm a strong +1 on removal. If we didn't mark as deprecated in 1.7 I
>suggest we do so now.


Can we at least move it to a separate plugin which can resurrected later
by someone if needed?

Thanks,
Salman


>
>Rufus
>
>> cheers
>> toby
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ckan-dev mailing list
>> ckan-dev at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-dev
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Co-Founder, Open Knowledge Foundation
>Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age
>http://www.okfn.org/ - http://blog.okfn.org/
>
>_______________________________________________
>ckan-dev mailing list
>ckan-dev at lists.okfn.org
>http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/ckan-dev