<blockquote>
<p>There is (to my mind) a key difference though - this is not an existing authentication provider that has set itself up as a general service and we have then chosen to offer to our users, rather it is an authentication provider that has been created specifically for the purpose of interacting with OpenStreetMap.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Actually, it is created for the purpose of better communicating with maps.me users. It will be included in maps.me soon, regardless of the state of this PR. And most our users, at least ten million (as we expect) will be registered there. If there is another application with millions of users, then why not add their service too (or connect them to ours).</p>
<p>The authentication endpoint in this request is created not because we want to route editors through our service, but because we want to minimize the hassle with two registrations, which means, to increase the number of people registering in OSM and editing it through our app.</p>
<p style="font-size:small;-webkit-text-size-adjust:none;color:#666;">—<br />You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.<br />Reply to this email directly, <a href="https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1433#issuecomment-293511888">view it on GitHub</a>, or <a href="https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABWnLShVeLh3w2n3PvRoLEk3IlmFHgkBks5rvI2-gaJpZM4L8Kyb">mute the thread</a>.<img alt="" height="1" src="https://github.com/notifications/beacon/ABWnLaau_9E9eIv2IU0mVMlNaaxthJJnks5rvI2-gaJpZM4L8Kyb.gif" width="1" /></p>
<div itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/EmailMessage">
<div itemprop="action" itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/ViewAction">
<link itemprop="url" href="https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1433#issuecomment-293511888"></link>
<meta itemprop="name" content="View Pull Request"></meta>
</div>
<meta itemprop="description" content="View this Pull Request on GitHub"></meta>
</div>
<script type="application/json" data-scope="inboxmarkup">{"api_version":"1.0","publisher":{"api_key":"05dde50f1d1a384dd78767c55493e4bb","name":"GitHub"},"entity":{"external_key":"github/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website","title":"openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website","subtitle":"GitHub repository","main_image_url":"https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/17495839/a5054eac-5d88-11e6-95fc-7290892c7bb5.png","avatar_image_url":"https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/143418/15842166/7c72db34-2c0b-11e6-9aed-b52498112777.png","action":{"name":"Open in GitHub","url":"https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website"}},"updates":{"snippets":[{"icon":"PERSON","message":"@Zverik in #1433: \u003e There is (to my mind) a key difference though - this is not an existing authentication provider that has set itself up as a general service and we have then chosen to offer to our users, rather it is an authentication provider that has been created specifically for the purpose of interacting with OpenStreetMap.\r\n\r\nActually, it is created for the purpose of better communicating with maps.me users. It will be included in maps.me soon, regardless of the state of this PR. And most our users, at least ten million (as we expect) will be registered there. If there is another application with millions of users, then why not add their service too (or connect them to ours).\r\n\r\nThe authentication endpoint in this request is created not because we want to route editors through our service, but because we want to minimize the hassle with two registrations, which means, to increase the number of people registering in OSM and editing it through our app."}],"action":{"name":"View Pull Request","url":"https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/pull/1433#issuecomment-293511888"}}}</script>