Auth doc component #5643
Auth doc component #5643
Conversation
jannyHou
force-pushed
the
auth-doc-refactor
branch
from
055f2b7 to
b9ae852
Compare
jannyHou
force-pushed
the
auth-doc-component
branch
from
4dc9fa5 to
49833ff
Compare
jannyHou
force-pushed
the
auth-doc-component
branch
3 times, most recently
from
12a0e1a to
564296d
Compare
|
|
||
| </details> | ||
|
|
||
| By default, `authenticate` is **not** part of the sequence of actions, so you |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
authenticate == the authenticate action?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yep, seems the word is confusing, any better suggestion? maybe "authenticate"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
authenticate makes sense to me.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👌 changed to authenticate
| An authentication action `AuthenticateFn` is provided by the | ||
| `AuthenticateActionProvider` class. | ||
|
|
||
| `AuthenticateActionProvider` is defined as follows: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
When reading the original documentation (before the refactoring), I was wondering why we need to include the source code of the provider. If we want to describe what the AuthenticateActionProvider does, would it be better to list them out?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel it aims to describe the provider with comments in code: there are 3 comments in the code snippet and the 1st one above strategy getter has many lines.
| Here is an example of a custom sequence which utilizes the `authentication` | ||
| action. | ||
|
|
||
| ```ts |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
in the todo-jwt example, we are using the default sequence that comes with the scaffolded LB app. Maybe we use that instead? Or explain when we want to create a separate sequence?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What i meant is that the sequence.ts is created by default when we're scaffolding the app. In the snippet here seems to guide the users to create a new sequence?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@dhmlau I rephrased it to be:
By default, "authenticate" is not part of the sequence of actions, so you
must modify the default sequence and add the authentication action.
And
Here is an example of a modified sequence which utilizes the
authenticate
action.
jannyHou
force-pushed
the
auth-doc-component
branch
from
e924192 to
afca4b5
Compare
|
|
||
| </details> | ||
|
|
||
| By default, `authenticate` is **not** part of the sequence of actions, so you |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
authenticate makes sense to me.
| It is up to the developer to throw the appropriate HTTP error code from within a | ||
| custom authentications strategy or its custom services. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is L180 one of these options?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@agnes512 Yep that's correct.
| Parameters of the `@authenticate` decorator can be obtained via dependency | ||
| injection using the `AuthenticationBindings.METADATA` binding key. It returns | ||
| data of type `AuthenticationMetadata` provided by `AuthMetadataProvider`. The | ||
| `AuthenticationStrategyProvider`, discussed in a later section, makes use of | ||
| `AuthenticationMetadata` to figure out what **name** you specified as a | ||
| parameter in the `@authenticate` decorator of a specific controller endpoint. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like this paragraph contains too much information. Is it possible to just provide minimum information to explain the mechanism?
For example ( I might not understand it correctly):
With the binding key AuthenticationBindings.METADATA, the
AuthenticationStrategyProvider, which will be discussed in a later section, can figure out what strategy name is specified in the @authenticate decorator.
Cause I assume that at this point the reader should know how binding key works and @authenticate decorates the endpoint.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@agnes512 Not really, people don't always read all docs in sequence...personally I feel this paragraph is good and necessary, so I tend to keep it as is.
(but thank you for writing the draft 👍 )
jannyHou
force-pushed
the
auth-doc-component
branch
from
e7b9d8d to
0e09c6f
Compare
Sub PR for #5598
Update the authentication-component page with new layout.
Given the length of this page, I break it down into sub pages for each topic. I run doc preview to make sure links all work.
Screenshots:
New menu:
Pages:
Overview
Decorator
Action
Strategy
Option
Checklist
👉 Read and sign the CLA (Contributor License Agreement) 👈
npm testpasses on your machinepackages/cliwere updatedexamples/*were updated👉 Check out how to submit a PR 👈