Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
auth refactor #237
auth refactor #237
Changes from 1 commit
999c6ec
927fac7
ddc45b2
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
probably should add a log here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Currently it's the same behavior is before. (previous, it throw AuthError which is specially ignore)
Do we have a static logger here? If not, I'm not sure it's worth adding at this level.
Since this method already throwing and having return value, it can delegate it externally without adding additional dependecy. (which can also be useful information for the app to decide whether to use 400/401)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
not sure creating a throwaway response makes a clearer statement than passing
undefined
. I'll try to refactor this later so it'll be possible to create a readonlycookieSessionStore
but better to leave it out of this PR due to possible conflicts.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I started with using a throw-away mock proxy based object, it worked, but it based on the awareness of the cookie's internal details doesn't manipulate the returned object from the Server request.
I thought it was a bit safer and cleaner that way, but I can also create the throw-away object inside the session store so it won't leak.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Move it inside the session store.
Does it conflict with your PR?