-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3064/#review4752
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Looks good. Thanks. This is the better place to flow additional authorization 
parameters into access token request.
Would you please send an Eclipse based patch? thanks.

- li


On 2012-02-01 14:54:12, Doug Davies wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/3064/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2012-02-01 14:54:12)
> 
> 
> Review request for shindig.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> It would be nice if the GrantRequestHandler had access to the original 
> request object so that it could use values like the security token to pass 
> along additional params to the authorization code request. In our 
> implementation we set values within the security token's trusted json field 
> that we'd like to pass along to our GrantRequestHandler implementation.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug SHINDIG-1672.
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-1672
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   
> /trunk/java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/oauth2/handler/BasicAuthenticationHandler.java
>  1238728 
>   
> /trunk/java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/oauth2/handler/ClientCredentialsGrantTypeHandler.java
>  1238728 
>   
> /trunk/java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/oauth2/handler/CodeAuthorizationResponseHandler.java
>  1238728 
>   
> /trunk/java/gadgets/src/main/java/org/apache/shindig/gadgets/oauth2/handler/StandardAuthenticationHandler.java
>  1238728 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/3064/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Added unit test in CodeGrantTypeHandlerTest (testGetCompleteUrl_5).  It tests 
> that the complete url sent to the authentication server has the parameter set 
> in the accessor.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Doug
> 
>

Reply via email to