Hi Chas,
Great, I'm glad you think this is a useful contribution, and thanks for
the encouraging words!
To address some specific points:
> I know that Friend's docs are
> particularly dense, especially for anyone that just wants to use the
> stuff. That's probably due to my using the docs to talk through the
> library's design more than anything else, in part to help potential
> workflow authors understand what's going on,
Yes, the Friend README is dense, but at the same time it is really
helpful to have that volume of information there (especially rather than
not at all). What I would like to do is help provide some transitional
material from a more basic integration level up to the level of detail
you provide in your README.
I'm wondering if you are game for changing that into a structure
somewhat like how Ring and Compojure are structured--I personally feel
like those have a great setup:
- Basic high-level information in the main README, with links to
- Wiki with detailed examples and rationale, and
- API docs
So, that's my proposal, and I'm happy to do a pull request
re-structuring the README to fit in this pattern (or something
else...just one proposal) if you're interested.
Also, it's awesome, but damn, that Tolkien quote is long. ;-)
> in part to provoke
> people into protesting certain decisions (this is my first swing at
> writing an authentication/authorization library, which should petrify
> you... ;-)
I have to be honest and say I am not a security guy either; but I have
been doing this long enough that I'm not entirely naive about web
security (and I really doubt you are from what you've written). It
seems like you're starting from a good basis by attempting to emulate
some of the other systems you listed--stuff like Warden (which I'm
familiar with) and Spring Security (which I have to learn more about).
In the end, I think the best thing is to get the software out there as
quickly as possible and describe your thought process--exactly as you've
done.
And once I've implemented more Friend-based apps, I'll have a better
idea of suggestions to make to improve both architecture and
security--so I'll speak up when I've got more experience with it.
> I daresay you're getting the jump on me in both directions, which I
> really appreciate.
Great--if you think this is a good direction then I'll keep working on
all of this stuff.
> I think a good next step would be for me to create a Friend
> organization (of course https://github.com/friend is taken! :-P),
Doh. Damnit, there's nothing there, that's annoying. I wonder if we
could politely ask them to hand it over and see if whoever is there is
open to the possibility...
Well, another option is to format it like ring:
https://github.com/ring-clojure/ring
...something like "friend-clojure" perhaps?
> so
> that you and others can readily contribute tutorials, example
> projects, and more that can be gradually cultivated into canonical,
> easily-approachable code and content.
Okay, sounds great! Just let me know, and I'll start adding this stuff
to that group.
Cheers,
DD
(12/10/07 6:33), Chas Emerick wrote:
Hi Dave,
This is a metric ton of awesome; thank you very much for taking the
time and effort to put all this together. And, BTW, based on what
I've seen so far, I never would have thought you were new to Clojure.
:-)
cont'd…
On Oct 6, 2012, at 11:49 AM, Dave Della Costa wrote:
I think Chas Emerick writes much better docs than much of what
accompanies most Clojure libraries, but he's quite an advanced
Clojure developer, and he's moving very fast--so as a newbie, I had
difficulty even with his relatively good docs for Friend. And I
suspect you'll be getting more and more folks from the web
development world in the next few years like me. So it will be
good to have things from the perspective of someone not just trying
to grok the libraries that exist, but also trying to understand how
Clojure works, and how the eco-system fits together.
Noted re: Friend's docs. I've actually fallen behind a bit on my
documentation activities this year; both Friend and nREPL are
underdocumented at the moment. I know that Friend's docs are
particularly dense, especially for anyone that just wants to use the
stuff. That's probably due to my using the docs to talk through the
library's design more than anything else, in part to help potential
workflow authors understand what's going on, in part to provoke
people into protesting certain decisions (this is my first swing at
writing an authentication/authorization library, which should petrify
you... ;-)
I've known for some time that I'd like to have a companion project
that implements all sorts of common usage scenarios that can be
easily pushed up to heroku in order to facilitate experimentation.
Pairing those with end-user-focused tutorials would be even better.
I daresay you're getting the jump on me in both directions, which I
really appreciate.
I've written some material on how to use Friend, including some
OAuth2 resources. I'd appreciate any feedback you can give, I'm
pretty new to Clojure (and Lisp in general).
In any case:
https://github.com/ddellacosta/friend-interactive-form-tutorial
https://github.com/ddellacosta/friend-oauth2-examples
https://github.com/ddellacosta/friend-oauth2
I am personally very interested in friend-oauth2, for obvious
reasons. (Onlookers can watch
https://github.com/cemerick/friend/issues/23 for activity between it
and Friend itself.) I haven't worked through the tutorial, but I did
find it really well-written and a phenomenal start.
I think a good next step would be for me to create a Friend
organization (of course https://github.com/friend is taken! :-P), so
that you and others can readily contribute tutorials, example
projects, and more that can be gradually cultivated into canonical,
easily-approachable code and content.
Talk later…
Thanks again,
- Chas
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
