Panopto-oauth2-integration documentation #120
Conversation
❌ Deploy Preview for strong-fairy-c1bde1 failed.
|
❌ Deploy Preview for thoth-tech failed.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Review - Request Changes
Summary
Thank you for your effort in documenting the Panopto OAuth2 Integration process. The documentation is well-organized, and the steps are detailed enough for developers to follow. However, I have identified a few areas where improvements can be made for consistency, technical accuracy, and clarity.
For your convenience, I am attaching a revised version of the Markdown file with the suggested changes for your appreciation and guidance:
Panopto_OAuth2_Integration_Guide_version2.md
Positive Feedback
- The instructions for creating an API client in Step 1 are clear and provide practical examples, such as naming the client and setting the application type.
- Including an example redirect URL in Step 3 is very helpful and makes the OAuth2 flow easier to understand.
- The code snippet for the
curlrequest is well-structured and clearly demonstrates the required parameters for token exchange.
Requested Changes
Correct Technical Details
-
File Section:
curl command
Suggestion:
Ensure thegrant_typeparameter is spelled correctly asauthorization_code(American English), as per the OAuth2 standard and Panopto's API requirements. -
File Section: Placeholder explanations (
client_id,redirect_uri,code)
Suggestion:
Update the placeholder explanation forclient_id,redirect_uri, andcodeto explicitly clarify how these values should be obtained or configured.
Improve Clarity and Readability
-
File Section:
curl example
Suggestion:
Add inline comments in thecurlexample to describe the purpose of each parameter (e.g., grant type, authorization code, redirect URI, client ID, and client secret). -
File Section: Refresh tokens in Step 4
Suggestion:
Expand the explanation of the refresh token usage. Highlight how it simplifies user re-authentication for recurring uploads.
Address Development vs. Production Configurations
- File Section: CORS configuration in Step 2
Suggestion:
Include a note about updating the CORS settings for production environments with the actual production domain (e.g.,https://myapp.com), ashttps://localhostis only suitable for local development.
Security Recommendations
-
File Section: HTTPS for production
Suggestion:
Add a reminder to use HTTPS for all communications in production to ensure secure token handling. -
File Section: Secure credential storage
Suggestion:
Emphasize the importance of storing sensitive credentials (like client secrets) in a secure secret manager instead of hardcoding them or storing them in plaintext.
Error Handling
- File Section: Step 4 (Integrating with OnTrack)
Suggestion:
Recommend implementing robust error handling for cases where tokens expire or are invalid. This ensures smooth operation and a better user experience.
Additional Suggestions
- File Section: Common Errors and Troubleshooting
Suggestion:
Add a "Common Errors and Troubleshooting" section to help developers resolve potential issues, such as:- Mismatched redirect URIs.
- Expired or invalid tokens.
- Incorrectly configured API client credentials.
Conclusion
These changes will make the documentation more accurate, user-friendly, and secure, while aligning with OAuth2 best practices. Once these updates are made, I will be happy to approve the PR. Let me know if you have any questions about the requested changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Panopto_OAuth2_Integration_Guide_version2.md
Consistency and Accuracy
File Section: OAuth2 Authorization URL
Suggestion: The authorization URL provided is accurate. However, it might be helpful to explicitly mention replacing both the client_id and redirect_uri placeholders with actual values. Example:
"Replace YOUR_CLIENT_ID with the actual client ID provided in Step 1 and ensure the redirect URI exactly matches the one configured in Panopto."
Technical Details
File Section: grant_type=authorisation_code
Suggestion: The grant type is currently spelled as authorisation_code (British English). According to OAuth2 standards and Panopto's documentation, the correct spelling is authorization_code (American English). Please update this to ensure compatibility with Panopto's API.
CORS and Redirect Configuration
File Section: Redirect URI Configuration
Suggestion: Consider clarifying that the redirect URI should be registered exactly as defined, including the protocol (http:// or https://) and port number. For example:
"Ensure the redirect URI configured in Panopto matches http://localhost:9127/redirect exactly, as mismatched URIs will cause authentication errors."
Readability
File Section: Code Block for curl Token Exchange
Suggestion: The curl example for exchanging the authorization code for a token is clear. To improve readability, consider adding comments above each parameter to explain their purpose.
Example:
Example:
# The grant type being used for the exchange
-d "grant_type=authorization_code" \
# The authorization code obtained in Step 3
-d "code=YOUR_AUTHORIZATION_CODE" \
# The redirect URI registered in Panopto
-d "redirect_uri=http://localhost:9127/redirect" \
# The client ID generated in Step 1
-d "client_id=YOUR_CLIENT_ID" \
# The client secret generated in Step 1
-d "client_secret=YOUR_CLIENT_SECRET"Additional Feedback
File Section: Step 1 (Creating the API Client)
Comment: The instructions for creating the API client are clear and detailed. Providing an example of a client name (e.g., "OnTrack Integration Client") helps the user understand what’s expected. Great job!
File Section: Step 3 (Authorization Code Flow)
Comment: The explanation of the authorization code flow is thorough and well-structured. Including the redirect example URL (http://localhost:9127/redirect?code=AUTHORIZATION_CODE) makes the process easy to follow.
File Section: Handling Refresh Tokens
Comment: It might be beneficial to include a brief explanation of how refresh tokens can improve user experience by reducing the need for re-authorization. For example:
"Refresh tokens allow the application to request new access tokens without prompting the user, thereby streamlining the experience for recurring video uploads."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi, thank you so much for the review, additionally thank you greatly as well for the improvements. Its very informative having a different set of eyes to look at the documentation which I probably assumed a lot of prior knowledge.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@epineto Just added you changes. Thanks again for the comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @washyking,
Thank you for your quick and thoughtful response to the feedback, as well as for incorporating the suggested changes. It’s been a pleasure reviewing your work, and I appreciate the effort you’ve put into improving the documentation. The updated version looks fantastic and addresses all the points raised, making it much clearer and more user-friendly.
Your openness to feedback and prompt actions truly reflect great collaboration skills. Keep up the amazing work!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Review - Approved
Hi @washyking,
I’ve reviewed the updated version of the documentation, and I’m pleased to say that all the requested changes have been implemented perfectly. The documentation is now technically accurate, easy to follow, and aligns well with best practices.
With these updates, I’m happy to approve this pull request. Great job again, and thank you for your efforts in enhancing the quality of this guide!
| #### 1. Initiate Multipart Upload: | ||
| - Get the Upload URL: After creating a session, extract the ```UploadTarget``` URL from the session creation response. This URL specifies where the video should be uploaded. | ||
|
|
||
| - Set Up AWS SDK : Even though Panopto doesn’t require AWS credentials, use AWS SDK to handle the multipart upload. Initialise the SDK with dummy credentials (to bypass authentication but still use the multipart upload logic). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Use of standard library is preferred over introducing new wrapper libraries. Specially, when they are platform specific, like AWS S3, which can introduce breaking changes depending on the direction the platform takes.
See the second answer in this post to see how a multipart file upload can be done with standard library in ruby. https://stackoverflow.com/a/46669328
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I’ve read the comment and made the changes accordingly. I replaced the use of AWS SDK with Rubys standard library for the multipart file upload, as suggested.
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| # Initiate multipart upload | ||
| mpu = s3.create_multipart_upload(Bucket: 'upload-bucket', Key: 'video-file.mp4') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does the concept of bucket exist in Panopto or is this just a dummy too?
If Panopto offers storage via only S3 compatible object storage, then using the AWS SDK might make sense, but I doubt that is the case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Panopto uses S3-compatible object storage for uploading files. The concept of a bucket in Panopto is different from AWS S3. The S3 multipart upload method is how I chose to handle the file upload, but the actual storage is managed by Panopto, not AWS S3
Using ruby libraries only excludes AWS
|
Integration plan looks good. If that is the case, PR 124 should be closed @washyking . |
Description
Added documentation for Panopto OAuth2 integration.
This documentation provides a step-by-step guide on how to integrate the Deakin Panopto video uploader with the OnTrack system. It includes details on setting up OAuth2 authentication, creating sessions, and uploading videos to Panopto using the API. The guide is intended to streamline the integration process and assist with successful API calls for video uploads.
Type of change