Skip to content
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

Re-align CustomAuth #75

Merged
merged 27 commits into from
Oct 24, 2024
Merged

Re-align CustomAuth #75

merged 27 commits into from
Oct 24, 2024

Conversation

metalurgical
Copy link
Contributor

@metalurgical metalurgical commented Jun 12, 2024

This PR seeks to re-align the current implementation of custom-auth-swift to that of the web implementation of CustomAuth.

This will reduce the overhead of differences a developer would need to remember between the two and provide an overall better experience.

This will also provide better long term maintainability and make feature parity simpler to implement between the two.

PassKeys is not part of this PR.

Note this is a breaking change and needs to be released as a major version.

This PR seeks to re-align the current implementation of custom-auth-swift to that of the web implementation of CustomAuth.

This will reduce the overhead of differences a developer would need to remember between the two and provide an overall better experience.

This will also provide better long term maintainability and make feature parity simpler to implement between the two.

Note this is a breaking change and needs to be released as a major version.
@metalurgical metalurgical marked this pull request as ready for review July 30, 2024 16:30
Sources/CustomAuth/Helpers/Common.swift Show resolved Hide resolved
Sources/CustomAuth/CustomAuthArgs.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Sources/CustomAuth/CustomAuth.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Sources/CustomAuth/CustomAuth.swift Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Check defaults for CustomAuthArgs
Check login types, implement caseSensitiveField helper function, use helper in getVerifierId
commenting it out since it will need to be put back in the passkeys implementation
@metalurgical
Copy link
Contributor Author

metalurgical commented Sep 9, 2024

Comments have been resolved. I think more than once review and approval on this PR is very necessary, before it can be merged.

@metalurgical
Copy link
Contributor Author

Close #32
Close #51
Close #74

Resolve #7
Resolve #8
Resolve #10
Resolve #12
Resolve #18
Resolve #52
Resolve #66
Close #7
Close #8
Close #10
Close #12
Close #18
Close #52
Close #66

Copy link
Member

@himanshuchawla009 himanshuchawla009 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

Copy link
Member

@chaitanyapotti chaitanyapotti left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@chaitanyapotti chaitanyapotti merged commit a06983f into master Oct 24, 2024
1 check passed
@chaitanyapotti chaitanyapotti deleted the features_update branch October 24, 2024 08:29
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants