Hi there,
IIRC, OIDC was contributed to grist-core by a third party (associated with the french government?): Add native OIDC support in Grist #707 by fflorent · Pull Request #717 · gristlabs/grist-core · GitHub, presumably under Apache 2.0.
As such, I was very surprised to see that my Grist instances complained to me that OIDC was now a paid-only feature. (or “license-key-only”? This is unclear.)
Has the licensing of the OIDC code been changed? Has the original author ( fflorent (Florent) · GitHub ) agreed?
I do not have a license key installed on my instance (nor do I intend to, see below). At the same time, the OIDC integration (with my Gitlab) that I have set up appears to continue to work, in apparent contradiction to the stated license key requirement.
Furthermore, it appears to me that Grist categorically relies on third-party auth providers, and IIRC, when I installed Grist, OIDC and SAML were the only options. I understand that, following this documentation page, nowadays:
- forwarded headers
- “GristConnect”, and
- sign-in that’s critically dependent on a proprietary service run by a third party
are the only remaining options in the “community edition”. I recall OIDC was painful to get working with Grist, and its implementation appears to (continue to) have significant issues (example). I guess I can slop together an OIDC-to-“GristConnect” bridge if I have to (which I would release as open source, because you’re welcome). But I would first like positive confirmation that this is what’s needed.
I understand that Grist Labs needs to make money. I am supportive of that goal, and I have repeatedly sponsored Grist Labs on Github, most recently on June 30 of this year. This apparent change, whose impact includes cutting off previously-enthusiastic users from their painfully-installed authentication methods, appears ill-conceived in furtherance of that goal.
At this point, I have no idea what is going on. Clarification of the status of OIDC would be very welcome.
Note that I am not at all interested in installing a “license key”, irrespective of whether it is free of charge in my situation. I like the notion that I own the software I run and can do with it as I please, without funny permission bits controlled by a third party.
Thanks,
Andreas