-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 136
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
Minor doc enhancements around authentication providers #7710
Conversation
site/docs/develop/java.md
Outdated
@@ -210,18 +210,46 @@ The documentation for how to configure Nessie server authentication can be found | |||
The `BasicAuthenticationProvider` allows connecting to a Nessie server that has `BASIC` authentication enabled. | |||
Note that `BASIC` is not supported in production and should only be used for development/testing. |
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 believe servers (outside of unit tests) do not allow "basic" auth at all. Cf. this in applicaiton.properties
:
# fixed at buildtime
quarkus.http.auth.basic=false
Would you mind fixing this doc paragraph too?
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 think we can remove references to BASIC
auth from all docs at this point. WDYT?
"https://<oidc-server>/realms/<realm-name>/protocol/openid-connect/token", | ||
CONF_NESSIE_OAUTH2_CLIENT_ID, "my_client_id", | ||
CONF_NESSIE_OAUTH2_CLIENT_SECRET, "very_secret"); | ||
NessieApiV2 api = |
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 noticed incidentally when creating this example that the programmatic configuration of the OAuth2 provider is convoluted. There is no easy factory method available, and OAuth2Client
and OAuth2ClientParams
are package-private.
Should we improve that? (In a separate PR, of course.)
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.
+1 to improvement :)
No description provided.