[OpenID] Moving OpenID code repositories

[Chris Messina]

I talked to Brian Ellin personally at the PoCo summit. Otherwise, no,
I have not.

I'm primarily interested in the OpenID Enabled libraries for now --
and then we can look at how we could go about improve the specific
libraries per language and inviting each maintainer in once the move
has been made.

It's kind of a chicken and egg problem, with the most momentum to be
gained from having the Janrain libraries moved first and then
corralling the others, where there's interest.

I know that a bunch of the OAuth libraries are maintained outside of
the main Google Code repository, but we try to keep the majority of
them available and accessible in one place, unless it makes sense to
maintain them elsewhere (as in the case of Ruby and Perl).

If other maintainers are following this thread, I'd be eager to hear
your thoughts on this proposal.

Chris

On Sun, Oct 5, 2008 at 8:15 PM, David Recordon <drecordon at sixapart.com> wrote:
> +1 for Google Code (if this happens), but have you been talking with the
> current library maintainers to see if they would even move their code?
>
> --David
>
> On Oct 5, 2008, at 10:26 PM, Chris Messina wrote:
>
>> I've been having conversations with folks about the current OpenID
>> libraries lately and it seems to me that it would be highly valuable
>> to both consolidate the existing [good] libraries, to get more
>> visibility and transparency into their development, to increase the
>> number of contributors, to give the foundation more direct management
>> of the codebase, to open up the support queue, to enable branching,
>> and to also go about creating separate libraries for each respective
>> language, rather than just using ports of the Python libraries.
>>
>> Yes, this is a tall order, but given the experience I've had with
>> pushing the development of OAuth libraries (http://oauth.net/code), I
>> think we need to shift where and how the development happens to get
>> more momentum going and make it easier to manage project access.
>>
>> I propose that we make use of either Google Code or Github. I'm not
>> looking for a religious battle here; I'm personally more familiar and
>> comfortable with Google Code, but Github has proven to be a rather
>> excellent tool for distributed/decentralized development.
>>
>> This request is primarily initiated from conversations I've had in the
>> course of working on the DiSo Project -- both from WordPress and
>> Drupal devs... and from folks who have submitted patches to the
>> openidenabled dev list [1] which have been ignored.
>>
>> Such impressions can lead to lasting impressions, and if anything, we
>> need to radically improve the community and developer footprint of
>> OpenID -- and turn it into a leading open source initiative. Working
>> with top tier tools is the place to start.
>>
>> Now, there's one caveat here that requires a nod from the Sourceforge
>> project maintainers: the Sourceforge project
>> (http://openid.sourceforge.net/) currently redirects to the wiki. This
>> means that the "OpenID" project name is reserved on Google Code, so if
>> we want to make use of that project, the folks who own the Sourceforge
>> project would need to give us the go-ahead to reuse that project name
>> (Google reserved all the Sourceforge project names to prevent
>> squatting).
>>
>> If yes, we can go about getting the projects started up -- perhaps
>> following the architecture of the OAuth repository:
>>
>> http://code.google.com/p/oauth/source/browse/#svn/code
>>
>> I look forward to your thoughts and feedback.
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Chris
>>
>> [1] http://lists.openidenabled.com/mailman/listinfo/dev
>>
>> --
>> Chris Messina
>> Citizen-Participant &
>>  Open Source Advocate-at-Large
>> factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org
>> citizenagency.com # vidoop.com
>> This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private
>
>
>



-- 
Chris Messina
Citizen-Participant &
  Open Source Advocate-at-Large
factoryjoe.com # diso-project.org
citizenagency.com # vidoop.com
This email is:   [ ] bloggable    [X] ask first   [ ] private