[keycloak-dev] Invalid redirect_uri with passport

[Stian Thorgersen]

Yes please, do a PR to https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak-passport :)

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bruno Oliveira" <bruno at abstractj.org>
> To: "Stian Thorgersen" <stian at redhat.com>
> Cc: "Bill Burke" <bburke at redhat.com>, keycloak-dev at lists.jboss.org
> Sent: Friday, 5 December, 2014 9:28:31 AM
> Subject: Re: [keycloak-dev] Invalid redirect_uri with passport
> 
> No problem at all. Would you guys like to have the codebase under keycloak
> organization? Just let me know.

Yes, please. I guess it should be in a separate repo?

> 
> On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Stian Thorgersen <stian at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > 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
> >
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 
> --
> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato
> -
> @abstractj
> -
> Volenti Nihil Difficile
>