[ckan-dev] OpenID and the CKAN future

Wed Jul 11 01:02:04 UTC 2012

Noted :-)

On 9 July 2012 14:30, Haq, Salman <Salman.Haq at neustar.biz> wrote:
>
>
> 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
>


-- 
Co-Founder, Open Knowledge Foundation
Promoting Open Knowledge in a Digital Age
http://www.okfn.org/ - http://blog.okfn.org/