[keycloak-dev] Invalid redirect_uri with passport

[Stian Thorgersen]

There's benefits to both approaches, but the simple fact is we currently version everything the same. Keycloak, adapters, cartridges, etc. I don't want to have a special case for the Passport adapter, so let's use the same version at least for now. 

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruno Oliveira" <bruno at abstractj.org>
> To: "Bill Burke" <bburke at redhat.com>
> Cc: keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Thursday, 4 December, 2014 5:01:41 PM
> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Invalid redirect_uri with passport
> 
> On 2014-12-04, Bill Burke wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 12/4/2014 10:04 AM, Lucas Holmquist wrote:
> > >
> > >>On Dec 4, 2014, at 9:56 AM, Bill Burke <bburke at redhat.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>On 12/4/2014 9:19 AM, Bruno Oliveira wrote:
> > >>>On 2014-12-04, Bill Burke wrote:
> > >>>>I'd like to distribute this in the next release and document it.  Will
> > >>>>the appropriate Node.js distribution methods be available for this?
> > >>>>(Bower?)
> > >>>
> > >>>Hi Bill, it's distributed under npm here
> > >>>https://www.npmjs.org/package/passport-keycloak
> > >>>
> > >>>>Change the version to 1.1.Beta2 :)
> > >>>
> > >>>I'm not so sure about the versioning, it's a big bump for the first
> > >>>release. But I'm fine if you guys think the opposite.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>Doesn't matter.  Have it same version as Keycloak.  It will be easier to
> > >>keep track of compatibilities for both us and users.  BTW, our Tomcat
> > >>and Jetty are new, we didn't version it 0.0.alph1. :)
> > >
> > >i sort of disagree here.  This is just an adapter really, and should be on
> > >it’s own versioning independent of what the main key cloak distribution
> > >is.
> > >
> >
> > In my experience different versions just confuses people.  It starts to
> > become important when you have multiple major versions out in the wild and
> > there are incompatibilities between them.
> 
> Bill, my major concern about having the same versioning. Is people
> mistakenly assuming that this adapter is full compatible with all the
> features on
> Keycloak, which is not true at the moment. More work is required, like
> you asked for role mappings, bearer tokens and etc.
> 
> Does it make sense to you?
> 
> >
> >
> > --
> > Bill Burke
> > JBoss, a division of Red Hat
> > http://bill.burkecentral.com
> 
> --
> 
> abstractj
> PGP: 0x84DC9914
> _______________________________________________
> keycloak-dev mailing list
> keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-dev