Tag Archives: youtube api

WP YouTube Lyte 1.6.0: the one with the other API

I just released WP YouTube Lyte 1.6, featuring the following changes:

Proof the new player UI looks great;

Grizzly Bear – gun-shy [Official Music Video]

Watch this video on YouTube.

If you’re struggling to get a Google API key; there’s extensive information in the FAQ on the why, what & how. WP YouTube Lyte will automatically fall back to the old anonymous API v2 if you don’t provide a key. As API v2 will continue to work for a couple of more weeks, all will be fine. I am, in the mean time, working on a separate plugin that will automatically provide an API key for WP YouTube Lyte to use (and which in the future might offer other extra’s). You can contact me if you would be interested in test-driving that service-plugin.

WP YouTube Lyte and YouTube API v2 end of life

The YouTube API v2 is now officially to be shut down soon after April 20th. That’s bad news for WP YouTube Lyte, which uses this version of the API to perform unauthenticated read-only requests to fetch a.o. video title and thumbnail information (example here). The v3 API is supposed to simpler yet more powerful and migrating should not be a big problem, except for that little detail that v3 doesn’t allow unauthenticated requests at all. So I’ll need to add authentication (via an API key) to the mix, leaving me with the dilemma of having to choose between these approaches, none of which I really like:

  1. Tell WP YouTube Lyte users to get their own API key and have them enter it in the plugin’s settings-page. Risk: upsetting users who all of a sudden have to get an API key (“huh, what key?”)
  2. Get an API key myself and hardcode that in WP YouTube Lyte. Risk: abuse of that key (and neither a server key nor a browser key is applicable really), reaching limits, being denied access.
  3. Create and operate a proxy application that sits between the v3 API and each and every WP YouTube Lyte instance, taking care of authentication with an API key. Risk: having to write & install that proxy application, making sure it is available 24/7 (it’s a single point of failure) + obviously the same abuse-risk as in (2).

No, I’m definitively not happy … :-(