I whole-heartedly agree. I haven't had to deal with the provider side, but the consumer side is a bit of a nightmare too unless you're dealing ONLY with an established provider, like Twitter.
And the fact that, for ``python-oauth2``, the "2" refers to it being the second package.... Yeah, not happy the day I found that out.
Indeed, the naming of python-oauth2 is incredibly unfortunate.
OAuth is a mess in many languages and frameworks. It's unusable for anyone but those dedicated to its success, which is very strange because those are the same people who should be making it more accessible. But they are not.
We're looking at getting a provider implemented in the next quarter or so, and agree with the author's assessment. Particularly for oauth 2.0, the publicly-accessible stuff is in dismal shape.