5 ms·

I think libraries are complicated so that they can be flexible and support many different use cases. You could release one library for authentication that works

I think libraries are complicated so that they can be flexible and support many different use cases. You could release one library for authentication that works for one specific use case, but it would be useless for all others.

tluyben2 5y ago
As far as I have seen, so far in my career, this is all 'not invented here' stuff. Most things, like auth go from 'oh no mate, we need 10000x more complicated stuff, that Keycloak thing will never fit!' and then, 6 months later there is something like keycloak but worse, far less features, more complex but replacable in no time by keycloak without touching the keycloak (no customizing) sourcecode. But we cannot because we now invested 6000 hours into it. So now it is ours and we will continue to say it is very complicated and so nothing fits our complicated use case. Alternatively, tell me your complicated auth flows that will not have users running away screaming and are, therefor, bad ideas and should be replaced by cookie cutter stuff. Because that is where all of these things end up.
- kayodelycaon 5y ago
  A number of Ruby on Rails applications use Devise for basic account management and authentication. It's about as close as you can get to a cookie-cutter experience. As long as you follow the workflow, it's pretty straight forward to handle. Drop in the plugin you want, configure the API keys, and then wire it into your User model. Then you can customize the urls, views, and emails. You still have to read a fair amount of documentation and a lot of developers don't like the extra up-front work and reinvent the wheel because it's "simpler".
sbacic 5y ago
I'm not sure I buy into it - I don't think it's necessary that even simple use cases need to be complicated in order for the whole to be flexible. The simple use cases should just be plug and play. If you want a different solution: here are the tools, here is the documentation, have fun.

tluyben2 5y ago

As far as I have seen, so far in my career, this is all 'not invented here' stuff. Most things, like auth go from 'oh no mate, we need 10000x more complicated stuff, that Keycloak thing will never fit!' and then, 6 months later there is something like keycloak but worse, far less features, more complex but replacable in no time by keycloak without touching the keycloak (no customizing) sourcecode. But we cannot because we now invested 6000 hours into it. So now it is ours and we will continue to say it is very complicated and so nothing fits our complicated use case. Alternatively, tell me your complicated auth flows that will not have users running away screaming and are, therefor, bad ideas and should be replaced by cookie cutter stuff. Because that is where all of these things end up.

kayodelycaon 5y ago
A number of Ruby on Rails applications use Devise for basic account management and authentication. It's about as close as you can get to a cookie-cutter experience. As long as you follow the workflow, it's pretty straight forward to handle. Drop in the plugin you want, configure the API keys, and then wire it into your User model. Then you can customize the urls, views, and emails. You still have to read a fair amount of documentation and a lot of developers don't like the extra up-front work and reinvent the wheel because it's "simpler".

sbacic 5y ago

I'm not sure I buy into it - I don't think it's necessary that even simple use cases need to be complicated in order for the whole to be flexible. The simple use cases should just be plug and play. If you want a different solution: here are the tools, here is the documentation, have fun.