I have just uploaded https://github.com/jeff-zucker/solid-auth-cli which is a browserless version of solid-auth-client which will hopefully be usefull in comand-line scripts, tests, etc. (see Sol - a command line and interactive shell tool for Solid for one use of it).
@RubenVerborgh, many thanks for your software which I seem to like to pirate. Here are some questions for you (and anyone else who cares to chime in)
Any thoughts on the name? It’s built on top of solid-cli and adds to the perfect storm of confusion in that namespace, so I’m more than willing to change it.
And most importantly : how should the two libraries be handled to complement each other? For example, one of the tests I uploaded modifies rdflib’s fetcher.js to conditionally require either solid-auth-client or solid-auth-cli depending on if in a window or not. With that one line change, rdflib becomes able to be used with a persistent login without a browser. It’s been able to do that for reading public materials, but AFAIK, not for writing or for reading private materials. Anyway, it seems that it’s probably not a good idea for me to submit a patch to rdflib (and any other libraries which use solid-auth-client) providing that kind of conditional require. How can this be better handled? Both s-a-client and s-a-cli call each other when in the other’s context? Or a “solid-auth” module which does nothing but switch between the two and would allow for additional auth libraries should they arise?
I have more questions, but that’s enough for now