Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

2016-08-13 Thread Konstantin Ritt
I don't see any need in distinguishing different OAuth implementations for Qt -- once we have an "officially supported" Qt module, it'll be a default opt-in for the user's code. +1 for QtOAuth as a separate module Regards, Konstantin 2016-08-13 11:28 GMT+04:00 Sune Vuorela :

Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

2016-08-13 Thread Sune Vuorela
On 2016-08-12, Fredrik de Vibe wrote: > We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and > this is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech > preview. For this we'll need a new public repository. there is a handful of external

Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

2016-08-12 Thread Richard Moore
On 12 August 2016 at 11:40, Fredrik de Vibe wrote: > Hi all, > > We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and > this is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech > preview. For this we'll need a new public repository. > >

Re: [Development] New repository for QtOAuth

2016-08-12 Thread Lars Knoll
+1. Lars > On 12 Aug 2016, at 12:40, Fredrik de Vibe wrote: > > Hi all, > > We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and this > is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech preview. > For this we'll need a new public

[Development] New repository for QtOAuth

2016-08-12 Thread Fredrik de Vibe
Hi all, We have recently been working on an implementation of OAuth (1+2), and this is now approaching a state in which it can be distributed as a tech preview. For this we'll need a new public repository. The main reason for OAuth to reside in its own module (and not as a part of