Re: imgur.el and small packages to interface with commercial services

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sat, 02 Jul 2016 20:06:31 -0400 Richard Stallman <address@hidden> wrote: 
>
> RS> Each site will be different, so there is no benefit in implementing
> RS> them together.
>
>>> I disagree. The APIs are very similar among them. Do we want a package
>>> for every such service?
>
> RS> If it's feasible to support multiple sites with the same code, I
> RS> have nothing against it.
>
> OK. Lars? Would you consider a patch? Or do you want me to package it up
> and maintain it? Either way, the name change is your choice, I'm just
> proposing that it shouldn't be a reference to a specific commercial
> service.

Yes, having a general "upload image" package would be very nice.
However, they all seem to rely on access keys (and the like).  For
instance, imgur.el comes with a token that's connected to my account
(but images are uploaded as "public", so they're not tied to me once
they're uploaded).

And that feels kinda odd for a general package, but might be acceptable
for a specific package.

Ideally the distributed access key would be registered to the FSF or
GNU, but I'm not sure anybody would be interested...

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no