[gdal-dev] RFC for the new cloud credentials framework in PR 5463 and 5390?

[Sean Gillies]

Even,

At the very least, the new file duplicates storage of credentials that may
already be stored in cloud-specific credentials files, and creates a new
way for users to expose their secrets. Also, cloud providers and
organizations have moved or are moving to focusing on short-lived
credentials, SSO, etc. How useful is a cross-cloud credentials file if it
supports only static credentials? Why not support named profiles already
defined in cloud-specific files? Python and C++ programmers haven't needed
this framework because they can maintain their own maps of credentials or
roles to resources, so I guess this feature is mainly for command line
users? Do command line users do this kind of thing enough to warrant a new
framework?

On Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 8:45 AM Even Rouault <even.rouault at spatialys.com>
wrote:

> Sean,
>
> I saw them as business-as-usual enhancements not impacting the software in
> fundamental ways. I'm not sure what I would put in a RFC that is not in
> their commit message. Maybe I don't understand what your concern is.
>
> Even
> Le 24/03/2022 à 15:28, Sean Gillies a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
> The intent and scope of the features developed in
> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/5463 and
> https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/pull/5390 seem rather big and unclear to
> me. This seems to me to warrant an RFC. Yes? No?
>
>
-- 
Sean Gillies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20220324/e7f1a5ba/attachment.html>