Various improvements

[markbaas]

• Python 3
• Renamed module from provider to djoauth2
• In settings one can specify different client model
• Client model allows multiple users
• Authorization also checks on users now

This is the improvements I suggest.

[eculver]

@markbaas I like it. I especially like how you took the initiative to dive in and own some of this that has been lagging behind. I just need to dig in and go through a deeper review process before I'd feel comfortable merging it in. Which leads me to my next point...

Maintaining this project is quite a bit of work and it's mostly all on me and I haven't really been able to keep up. Would you be interested in helping out by becoming a maintainer? It would definitely help get this merged :)

I mention it because it's clear by this PR that you know how the codebase is working and its internals and I feel like I'm a huge bottleneck to the progress of the project.

Please feel free to hit me up on IRC (freenode/eculver) or via email e at eculver dot io.

Thanks again and I look forward to getting at least some if not all of this merged in ASAP.

[markbaas]

Did you receive my mail?

On 29-01-14 19:30, Evan Culver wrote:

@markbaas https://github.com/markbaas I like it. I especially like
how you took the initiative to dive in and own some of this that has
been lagging behind. I just need to dig in and go through a deeper
review process before I'd feel comfortable merging it in. Which leads
me to my next point...

Maintaining this project is quite a bit of work and it's mostly all on
me and I haven't really been able to keep up. Would you be interested
in helping out by becoming a maintainer? It would definitely help get
this merged :)

I mention it because it's clear by this PR that you know how the
codebase is working and its internals and I feel like I'm a huge
bottleneck to the progress of the project.

Please feel free to hit me up on IRC (freenode/eculver) or via email e
at eculver dot io.

Thanks again and I look forward to getting at least some if not all of
this merged in ASAP.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#67 (comment).

[eculver]

I did. I just haven't had a chance to respond. Thanks for reminding me though. I'll get back to you ASAP.

[pySilver]

Custom Client feature is extra cool, so one can save additional data along with tokens

[peterldowns]

Hey, just wanted to make note of the fact that there is an existing Django OAuth2 library named djoauth2. In fact, I wrote it! Is there any reason that this package has to be renamed to djoauth2? It might be confusing since the name is already registered to my package on pypi.

[eculver]

@peterldowns Thank you for pointing this out. I will make sure that this package provides a different name. To be honest, the PR has yet to be fully vetted, so your timing is great. @markbaas What do you think? I would be inclined to either keep it named provider for the time being or to make it something more obvious like auth_provider.

Ultimately, I want to remove the necessity of the base provider app. While the pattern is thoughtful and clean, it seems superfluous to have a separate app (provider.oauth2) for what would seem like OAuth-specific provider code. The entire package is OAuth specific by virtue of its name, so why not just have one oauth2_provider app (or similar) and lessen the complexity?

Thoughts?

[markbaas]

@peterldowns Thanks for finding out!

@eculver I believe the best approach is your last suggestion, just merge it into one app. I would like something of django in the name of the module as it is not a generic python oauth2_provider, but I cannot come up with anything else, so just go for oauth2_provider then.

[peterldowns]

@markbaas @eculver thanks for being understanding! By the way, I've been impressed by django-oauth2-provider, and it was one of the inspirations for me to write djoauth2 — thanks for making your work open source! And if either of you have some time to give feedback on my project it would be very much appreciated :)