It is also a good idea to wait a bit with the final vote to give people time to give feedback on your Phase-3 version of the proposal.
Yeah, I think a commitment to having the system Open Source would be nice to answer the concerns.
The binding options can be “Accept” and “Make no change”.
@clesaege would you be able to edit this post with phase-3 tag and metadata? I’m not sure all people are aware that it passed signalling
What is going on with this? We need this to happen for the marketplace…
After seeing Vitalik’s talk at EthCC about “Ethereum login”, I have been digging into alternative solutions likely more open and future-proof.
There is an EIP in the works on this https://github.com/anudit/eauth-eip/blob/main/README.md
The team behind EAuth and the EIP received a grant from the Ethereum Foundation in 2019.
Proposals must be submitted before July 30th, 2021
Great share! Sign-in is a big deal for bridging Ethereum with web2, it has been a common topic brought up by different projects. Makes sense EF & ENS are pushing it forward.
Good job Nacho! I’d 1000 times prefer to wait a bit more and have open source than having vendor lock-in.
I like ethmail and the idea of having our own login is cool. Just G needs to open the code.
Ok, in the context of this discussion should I add a section this proposal like this:
The payment will be made only after delivering open source implementation of Cryptoauth with PoH login.
I’m not sure if this is commitment enough.
I would like the vote to be straightforward, where people vote “Make no changes” only when they really don’t want me do implement this feature, and not because some other circumstances.
Maybe it would be good to revisit the idea of me providing a version of cryptoauth (open source of course) that you would be able to run on your own infrastructure?
As I see it right now we have options:
- Implement PoH login in cryptoauth as is, closed source on infrastructure maintained by me - this is fastest and cheapest
- Implement PoH login in cryptoauth + open source cryptoauth, still on infrastructure maintained by me - this will take longer at the same price
- Implement PoH login in cryptoauth + open source cryptoauth + help set it up on PoH infrastructure (kubernetes cluster) - this will take longer and have additional costs
There is also option where I first opensource cryptoauth and then you can take it and implement PoH login on top of it or choose some other “base” for it.
Let me know what do you think
I prefer this one “Implement PoH login in cryptoauth + open source cryptoauth + help set it up on PoH infrastructure (kubernetes cluster) - this will take longer and have additional costs” and with proper documentation to be easily integrated in other poh projects
I think it’s the way to go. There is no “PoH infrastructure”.
What You meant by PoH Infrastructure?
In terms of technical requirements cryptoauth needs a server to run on, more specifically it needs kubernetes cluster (it would be possible to setup on single server but it removes a lot of useful features, and would require additional work).
I’m fine with either solution just need to know which direction we are going in.
Well a DAO cannot directly handle a Kubernetes cluster, so it would be good for you to run it.
Hey, sorry for being silent, a lot is happening right now. I’m taking October off my normal job and I’ll be focusing on Cryptoauth and ETHMail, I’ll prepare proposal update for maintained version and post it here.
hi there my friend! @xunkulapchvatal.eth hope you have a well deserved rest, and a clear mind to work on these improvements.
just would like to give you a heads up that the login with proof of humanity option on discourse doesn’t seem to be working for some people. We get the error message saying we have <0 UBI tokens or something like that.
thanks in advance!
Thanks @xunkulapchvatal.eth for the lightning quick fix!