The topics about deeper system integrations let me wonder if it’s necessary to use the launcher as a single authorisation point. Although I see the upsides of this, I think it would be inconvinient to fire up the launcher and enter credentials everytime before enabling e.g. some file-browser integrations.
Would it be possible to “integrate” launcher functionality into apps? If this is not the case, is it planned to offeer an option to auto-start launcher and store credentials?
You only have to enter your credentials once to log in into the launcher. Once you are logged in to the launcher, you individually grant access to each app. Once the app is is granted access, it maintains that access until you choose to revoke that access.
This would defeat the purpose of the launcher. The Launcher is the gateway into the SAFE Network and the guardian of your credentials.
I know, and personally that’s okay for me. But if you think about deeply integrated apps like Dropbox for example this would still be a hurdle. Like said before, maybe it would be an option to auto-login. Then the app would just have to wait until the launcher finished logging in.
I think I get what you mean. Then all the app dev would have to do is program the app to auto launch the launcher. If the launcher is not installed, then the app could give the user a warning that it needs to install the launcher first. Or have the launcher installed as a bundle when installing the app.
Hm, I guess from what I have read so far now, that it’s not possible to integrate launcher functionality into the own app. Maybe it would then help to at least allow starting the launcher with credential parameters?
Side question (because I couldn’t find it in the code): How does the network check, that the requests come from the launcher app? Is there some kind of signature or hash value check?
Anyone can log directly into the network so avoiding the need for the launcher. This is advised against because it would mean the user having to log into every app that does this.
I think you would also be linking with the MaidSafe Rust libraries directly, which means you can’t build none-GLP3 licensed apps this way.
There is nothing special about the Launcher in this sense - you could write your own, or you could build an App that logs directly into the network without the Launcher.
Many thanks for the clarification! That’s what I thought initially, but got confused by the recent discussions. My main point is, that it can be practical to offer a standalone app or at least the user experience of a standalone app without telling the user “Hey, to use our app switch over to this other app called Launcher and enter your login data there.”
This is a drawback, yes, but may be acceptable, because you have to log-in in many other apps (Dropbox, Google Drive, etc.) too currently.
Concluding this discussion I see two possible options in the future to build seamless integrated apps:
1.) Create possibility to start launcher with credentials parameters and/or put it into auto-start with an option to store the credentials locally. So apps could wait until the launcher is available.
2.) Integrate launcher functionality into own app with the mentioned drawbacks.
@dirvine would be very interesting to hear some thoughts if option 1 is something which is planned (or at least considerable)