4 ms·

The main thing I was keen about was browser integration, which only the browser vendors could provide.

by Flimm 10y ago

reitanqild 10y ago
Couldn't it be done as a Firefox extension?
- anc84 10y ago
  Yes, but adoption would a tiny fraction of mainline support/promotion could accomplish.
  - reitanqild 10y ago
    Late reply, but: I think this is one of a few areas where a browser or extension developer can create something that will force every other browser vendor to adapt, sooner or later. Last time I feel that happened was with tabs, so IMO this should is a high-value target even if nobody seems to be interested ATM.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
callahad 10y ago
Persona was many things to many people -- arguably too many -- everyone from the old core team has a different idea of what features defined Persona. :) For me, it was the developer experience: trivial setup, email in/authentication out workflow, and no secrets to store in a database. Portier focuses narrowly on making that facet work well. Browser integration, identity aggregation, and privacy from users' own email providers are all non-goals for Portier: https://github.com/portier/portier.github.io/blob/master/Non-Goals.md https://github.com/portier/portier.github.io/blob/master/Non... That said, I'd love to ask what you found compelling about Persona's promise of browser integration. The privacy aspects? User experience? The finality of a standard successor to HTTP Basic / Digest authentication? Something else entirely?
pavon 10y ago
Same here. Mozilla giving up on this is really disappointing to me. When I first heard about it, I was really excited about how it provided more privacy that OAuth/OpenID, but the impression I got from reading the mozilla documentation/blogs was that the javascript client and mozilla operated servers were a temporary stop-gap to facilitate faster development, but sacrificed some of the benifits that the final end-goal would provide. Given that, I spent the time reading the whitepaper and playing with the API to give me a headstart, but delayed integrating it into production websites, because I thought that they were saying it wasn't production ready yet. Then they canceled the project because not enough people were using it.

The main thing I was keen about was browser integration, which only the browser vendors could provide.

by Flimm 10y ago

The main thing I was keen about was browser integration, which only the browser vendors could provide.

reitanqild 10y ago

Couldn't it be done as a Firefox extension?

anc84 10y ago
Yes, but adoption would a tiny fraction of mainline support/promotion could accomplish.
- reitanqild 10y ago
  Late reply, but: I think this is one of a few areas where a browser or extension developer can create something that will force every other browser vendor to adapt, sooner or later. Last time I feel that happened was with tabs, so IMO this should is a high-value target even if nobody seems to be interested ATM.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]

callahad 10y ago

Persona was many things to many people -- arguably too many -- everyone from the old core team has a different idea of what features defined Persona. :) For me, it was the developer experience: trivial setup, email in/authentication out workflow, and no secrets to store in a database. Portier focuses narrowly on making that facet work well. Browser integration, identity aggregation, and privacy from users' own email providers are all non-goals for Portier: https://github.com/portier/portier.github.io/blob/master/Non-Goals.md https://github.com/portier/portier.github.io/blob/master/Non... That said, I'd love to ask what you found compelling about Persona's promise of browser integration. The privacy aspects? User experience? The finality of a standard successor to HTTP Basic / Digest authentication? Something else entirely?

pavon 10y ago

Same here. Mozilla giving up on this is really disappointing to me. When I first heard about it, I was really excited about how it provided more privacy that OAuth/OpenID, but the impression I got from reading the mozilla documentation/blogs was that the javascript client and mozilla operated servers were a temporary stop-gap to facilitate faster development, but sacrificed some of the benifits that the final end-goal would provide. Given that, I spent the time reading the whitepaper and playing with the API to give me a headstart, but delayed integrating it into production websites, because I thought that they were saying it wasn't production ready yet. Then they canceled the project because not enough people were using it.