OAuth 1.0a a.k.a. OAuth 1.0 a.k.a. RFC 5849#10
OAuth 1.0a a.k.a. OAuth 1.0 a.k.a. RFC 5849#10matthewlmcclure wants to merge 15 commits intofireteam:masterfrom
Conversation
Enough to request a resource from my company's unreleased OAuth implementation.
Depends directly on oauthlib now.
And try to continue past Twitter's unexpected request token response Content-Type: text/html.
|
I eliminated the earlier dependency on Requests. The pull request as of this comment depends directly on oauthlib for OAuth1 signing. Here's an updated I tested it with both: What do you think? |
|
Is there a way to remove the other dependency as well and directly include the necessary functionality into that script? The advantage would be that it can be used without a virtualenv then which is an advantage for helper scripts. |
|
I wouldn't want to reimplement oauthlib's functionality. But I could On Dec 5, 2012, at 6:05 AM, Armin Ronacher notifications@github.com wrote: Is there a way to remove the other dependency as well and directly include — |
|
I made the oauthlib dependency optional. It's only required in case you want to use OAuth 1 authorization now. Care to pull this into your master branch? |
|
Just sent a pull request to @matthewlmcclure about this pull request. |
@mitsuhiko We had a brief conversation on Twitter.
Here's a proof of concept using oauthlib via requests.
A
.ftcurlish.json: https://gist.github.com/4158445.And a demonstration using Twitter: https://gist.github.com/4158502.
This is obviously not ready to merge. Just starting a conversation. Requests has a nice high level API, but I imagine you might not like that dependency. Maybe using oauthlib directly to sign requests and then passing its output to curl would be better.
What do you think?