Remove username/password support; always use tokens.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.

[tamird]

Fixes#89.

[tamird]

There's a lot of duplication here - I'm sure it can be cleaned up some, but I'd like to leave that to you @guybedford since I don't really know what I'm doing in JS :)

I tested this locally with a token that doesn't have public_repo and things worked.

[guybedford]

Thanks, this looks good to me.

The thing is, we need to retain backwards-compatibility - password authentication can't just be removed! So the prompt could perhaps read Enter your GItHub username or token:, and then if it looks like a token was entered (checking character count / character types used), skip the password entry. Then to switch auth between credentials as we have currently and a token request style.

I know it's a bit of work with all that, but backwards-compatibility is the cost having users :)

[tamird]

OK I've refactored this a bit to reduce the duplication. Perhaps you could help with the backwards compatibility bit?

[guybedford]

All this deleted code needs to remain.

[tamird]

OK, seems to me we can remove all the code that permits the old configuration to go in, we just need to keep the ability to read the old config. Updated.

[guybedford]

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in this version as it will break documented workflows.

[tamird]

Ah I might just revert the prompts. I'll let you know when I've done that.
On Jun 18, 2016 19:49, "Guy Bedford" notifications@github.com wrote:

We can definitely support the better token approach here, but I can't
merge this as the prompts are part of the API, we can't just remove them in
this version as it will break documented workflows.

—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#90 (comment), or mute
the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ABdsPG9AQFaGzpuLh28zc1nmNI-fEHIiks5qNIQEgaJpZM4Izqxv
.

[tamird]

Reverted the prompts! @guybedford PTAL

[guybedford]

Thanks! This looks great.

I think we should be able to alter the configuration prompts though - where it says enter your token or username, we can check if they entered a token and then skip asking for a password and set the auth object to a token mode already.

Let me know if that makes sense?

[tamird]

Done.

[guybedford]

Excellent, thank you again for your contributions!

[tamird]

Thanks! Could you cut a new release with this?

[guybedford]

Sure, I have done a 0.13.14.