Better support for custom provider

[adamkissvcc]

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Currently it's very hard to add a custom provider without forking Kratos.

Describe the solution you'd like

I would like the providers to "register themselves" in an init() function, instead of the current func (c ConfigurationCollection) Provider.

in provider_config.go:

var Providers = map[string]func(config *Configuration, public *url.URL)Provider{}

func (c ConfigurationCollection) Provider(id string, public *url.URL) (Provider, error) {
	for _, p := range c.Providers {
		if newProvider, ok := Providers[p.ID]; ok {
			return newProvider(&p, public), nil
		}

		providerNames := make([]string, 0, len(Providers))
		for pName := range Providers {
			providerNames = append(providerNames, pName)
		}

		return nil, errors.Errorf("provider type %s is not supported, supported are: %v", p.Provider, providerNames)
	}

	return nil, errors.WithStack(herodot.ErrNotFound.WithReasonf(`OpenID Connect Provider "%s" is unknown or has not been configured`, id))
}

in provider_*.go (eg: provider_slack.go)

func init() {
	Providers["slack"] = NewProviderSlack
}

func NewProviderSlack(
	config *Configuration,
	public *url.URL,
) Provider {
	return &ProviderSlack{
		config: config,
		public: public,
	}
}

Additional context

This would be one step forward for making kratos more pluggable :) . I would be happy to write up a merge request if you are ok with this approach.

[aeneasr]

That makes a lot of sense to me :)

[nanikjava]

@aeneasr any pointer to point me in the right direction to work on this ?

[aeneasr]

I think the OP has some good context, what help specifically are you looking for?

[nanikjava]

I think the OP has some good context, what help specifically are you looking for?

For a start I think what is the behaviour that is expected from the custom provider in terms of initialisation process.

[github-actions]

Hello contributors!

I am marking this issue as stale as it has not received any engagement from the community or maintainers for a year. That does not imply that the issue has no merit! If you feel strongly about this issue

• open a PR referencing and resolving the issue;
• leave a comment on it and discuss ideas on how you could contribute towards resolving it;
• leave a comment and describe in detail why this issue is critical for your use case;
• open a new issue with updated details and a plan for resolving the issue.

Throughout its lifetime, Ory has received over 10.000 issues and PRs. To sustain that growth, we need to prioritize and focus on issues that are important to the community. A good indication of importance, and thus priority, is activity on a topic.

Unfortunately, burnout has become a topic of concern amongst open-source projects.

It can lead to severe personal and health issues as well as opening catastrophic attack vectors.

The motivation for this automation is to help prioritize issues in the backlog and not ignore, reject, or belittle anyone.

If this issue was marked as stale erroneously you can exempt it by adding the backlog label, assigning someone, or setting a milestone for it.

Thank you for your understanding and to anyone who participated in the conversation! And as written above, please do participate in the conversation if this topic is important to you!

Thank you 🙏✌️

[bcordobaq]

@aeneasr @vinckr Do you have any plans to reconsider this feature? Is there something available?