-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
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
Update sso credential provider to support token provider #4875
Merged
Merged
Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
0a6e3a6
Update and Merge logic of sso credential provider to support token pr…
894c8cf
Merge branch 'feat-sso-session' into feat-sso-session-cred-provider
ae875c1
Add and Merge sso credential provider unit test data
175106b
Modify and Merge sso credential provider's token provider field and u…
a25a014
Merge branch 'feat-sso-session' into feat-sso-session-cred-provider
9d68ffd
Modify and Merge sso credential provider's token provider and unit test
9d605f3
Merge branch 'feat-sso-session' into feat-sso-session-cred-provider
2fb8973
Modify and Merge sso credential provider's unit test
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@ | ||
{ | ||
"accessToken": "ZhbHVldGhpcyBpcyBub3QgYSByZWFsIH", | ||
"expiresAt": "2021-01-19T23:00:00Z" | ||
} |
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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.
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.
@aajtodd @lucix-aws i am curious about your opinion here.
in my V2 implementation i did this same thing.
at the time, not knowing Go that well (or the Go SDK), this seemed fine to me. but i think i prob should have used the
TokenProvider
interface rather than theSSOTokenProvider
struct implementation. this is because our use of it doesnt seem to depend on anything specific to theSSOTokenProvider
: its just callingRetrieveBearerToken
. also, another benefit as @wty-Bryant pointed out in a conversation I had with him, if this were an interface we can more easily unit test it.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.
At first glance I think that's ok if you want to go down that route.
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.
Ok I will try to implement the interface route