Comments for "OAuth"

» Submit Your Comment
Please log in to enter your comment. If you are not a registered PEAR developer, you can comment by sending an email to
» Comments
  • Till Klampaeckel  [2008-08-18 22:24 UTC]


    I saw your updates, but the code I recently checked out (r38) from Google Code still had Net_URL in it (vs. you talking about Net_URL2), or is this my misunderstanding?

    Also, speaking of PHP4 vs 5 - I was wondering if you'd like to do a cURL-based driver for all HTTP instead of HTTP_Request, I'd contribute code also if you are too busy. Just let me know.

    Then I was wondering if you'd provide a build in way to override OAuth_Consumer::redirect() (I don't like the "header()-call" in there, I'd rather provide a screen to the user stating, 'You are redirect because of ...'.) or would you rather prefer people to extend your code and override there?

    Aside, some of your code could use some inline documentations. At the same time I also want to add that I didn't have too much trouble finding my way around. Great work. And I bet you are working on that before you call for votes. ;)

    Last but not least, a bug report:
    In OAuth_Consumer::setRequestScheme() your example dies.

    "'e' is an unsupported request scheme"

    I couldn't figure out at first why the in_array() with the constants did not work. (Besides, maybe make the array() 'static'?)

    When you comment it out, it moves on but the same issue is brought up by OAuth_Http_RequestToken::_attemptRequest(). Due to it being unable to match the scheme, the $httpClient var is null.

    The reason why it dies is because your example does "new OAuth_Consumer($consumer_key, $consumer_key_secret, $options);", while the definition of the __construct() states a single parameter "$options". I figured out that if I included the keys 'consumerKey' and 'consumerSecret' in the $options it works.

    To cut a long story short, once that was fixed it also worked on Pownce. :)

    If you do any updates, let me know. I'd try it out right away.

  • Till Klampaeckel  [2008-08-18 22:27 UTC]

    I forgot something. :D

    What I didn't like at all was the $_GET parameter to OAuth_Consumer::getAccessToken(). Of course OAuth is very webcentric, but sometimes $_GET is polluted with all kinds of data that I don't want to pass on. More direct/meaningful parameters would be great here.

    I think that's all - sorry for the long post. ;)
  • Joe Stump  [2008-10-10 10:59 UTC]

    1. I've noticed that none of the code inside of ( is documented with phpDocumentor.

    2. In setOptions() ( you have a bunch of case statements, which means that I can't add my own options in a child class. I'd recommend doing $func = 'set' . ucfirst($key) and then if (method_exists($this, $func)) { $this->$func($value); }

    3. Some of the spacing doesn't conform to the PEAR CS. Check out PHP_CodeSniffer's CLI utility phpcs for help with that.

    4. Are you looking for help with this package? We're going to be implementing OAuth soon at Digg and could probably help with a bunch of this stuff.
  • Pádraic Brady  [2008-10-15 20:13 UTC]

    Hi Joe,

    Unfortunately I'm currently in the middle of a large contract so I've dropped off the PHP public map for the moment.

    The component is actually a shared PEAR/Zend proposal and since I was collaborating on some improvements with a colleague, and at the same time remaining current with Google's official Zend GData source which is being converted to OAuth, a lot of our focus was on the Zend code.

    The PEAR version is really just an outdated version of the current ZF tree which you can locate at

    That version is the most current one - and barring one or two test cases I really need to fix - has been tested against multiple OAuth implementations in the wild.

    What I'll do in early November is re-sync that with the PEAR version and add some PEAR specific fixes and integrate any remaining PEAR comments before moving the proposal forward again. In the meantime I suggest using the Zend version for reference for what a PEAR port (I have the porting procedure automated but in a time when I can't even time a blog revival it's not done yet) would look like roughly. It does have some updates to the design which might alleviate some of the configuration concerns.

    Any questions, don't hesitate to drop me a line by email ( routes to my main personal account).

    Hopefully this sheds light on progress since August! :) It's not a dead project and I'm scheduling a release to the ZF for 1.8 now I have permission to continue development in the ZF Incubator (no messy ZF review pts taking up to a year to appear on this one!).

  • Till Klampaeckel  [2009-04-24 11:45 UTC]

    Hey Padraic,

    sorry to bug, is there any update on the syncing? :) If you'd like a hand, I need to dedicate a few days to oauth on a project, so I can chip in.

  • Christian Weiske  [2009-06-25 08:04 UTC]

    Is this proposal dead, or are you going to finish it?