-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.3k
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
identity/oidc: allow filtering the list providers response by an allowed_client_id #16181
Merged
Merged
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This passes the query parameters to backends for LIST operations. I don't see why we couldn't do this, but perhaps there is some context I'm missing 🤔
If we don't want to allow query parameters for LIST operations, I'm okay changing this to use a GET.
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.
Technically the "GET" verb can also translate to a
logical.ListOperation
, but that case omits parsing and passing in the rest of the query parameters into thelogical.Request.Data
.Should we also consider how to handle query params there if we make it available here? Would there be any backwards compatibility concerns if so?
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.
Thanks, that's a good callout. I can't think of any compatibility concerns. The "GET" with
?list=true
would result in aListOperation
handler being called, and it would be up to that handler implementation to parse data from query parameters. I don't think anyListOperation
handlers are parsing parameters today, so I can't think of a concern.That said, I'm okay with just allowing query parameters for "LIST" at this point. It's a small change, and it makes sense to use query parameters to filter lists. If users want consistent behavior with the GET-style list, we can always address 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.
I can see the value in keeping the behavior of GET with ?list=true and LIST the same in regards to query params. But I agree that it is a small change and we could wait to see if users want this available for GET ?list=true.