Add nfdi ops #1068
Add nfdi ops #1068
Conversation
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
…1.0 (python-social-auth#1049) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…1.1 (python-social-auth#1050) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
…1.2 (python-social-auth#1051) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
… v0.24.1 (python-social-auth#1052) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
This is possibly a breaking change for a few backends but makes the code follow RFC and removes need for every backend to override this. Fixes python-social-auth#284
Using md5 is insecure, but these services mandate it, so clearly describe that in the code.
This is mandated by third-party, but make the md5 usage explicitely documented.
This is mandated by third-party, but make the md5 usage explicitely documented.
This is a more secure way of keeping things up to date.
The try/except block should be used only for code expected to fail.
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
The random module is not suitable for use in security scopes.
The API is no longer available.
…cial-auth#1064) Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
for more information, see https://pre-commit.ci
|
@marcvs thanks a lot. I think your local CI error is not happening here, which is good. I'm not sure the types errors are related - to be they don't seem related. But lets wait for the maintainers to comment. Can you maybe cleanup your commits a bit. There are many unrelated commits in this PR. |
|
The type errors are not caused by your changes, but by pyright changes. I've pinned working version in #1072, so if you merge current master, it should pass. I will squash commits on merge, so don't worry much about messed up history here. |
|
@nijel thanks a lot! |
|
Yup. merged master and pushed to my PR branch. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #1068 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 77.88% 77.56% -0.33%
==========================================
Files 347 348 +1
Lines 10669 10708 +39
Branches 504 460 -44
==========================================
- Hits 8310 8306 -4
- Misses 2200 2245 +45
+ Partials 159 157 -2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The code looks mostly good. I'd like to see test for user data parsing. Also it would be great to add matching documentation to https://github.com/python-social-auth/social-docs.
| # users will be allowed | ||
| ALLOWED_ENTITLEMENTS = [] | ||
|
|
||
| def get_user_details(self, response): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please add tests for this? You can mock it using user_data_url and user_data_body attributes on the test class.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok; Many thanks!
Will do it, but won't manage before end of next week.
I'm adding a whole bunch of OPs for the german NFDI (national research data initiative).
Local tox did not work for me, so I try it this way.
My tests are not extensive so far. If initial feedback is positive, I'm willing to fix the tests, too.