Section 3.3 [1] of the OAuth2 spec suggests that an authorization server may
issue an access token with a scope different than what was requested. It
goes on to say that the authorization server SHOULD include a "scope"
response parameter to inform the client of the actual scope granted.
We'd lik
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/#review4362
---
Ship it!
Committed r1231211.
Thanks everyone for the reviews!
- Dan
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/#review4361
---
Ship it!
Thanks!
- li
On 2012-01-13 16:44:45, Dan Dumont wrote:
>
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/
---
(Updated 2012-01-13 16:44:45.741871)
Review request for shindig, Henry Saputra,
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/#review4360
---
Ship it!
LGTM
Thanks Dan!
- Jesse
On 2012-01-13 16:20:24, Dan Dum
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/
---
(Updated 2012-01-13 16:20:24.912530)
Review request for shindig, Henry Saputra,
> On 2012-01-12 23:25:46, Ryan Baxter wrote:
> > Looks like you added some additional methods to gadget site and container
> > util, do you want to also make the corresponding changes in the feature.xml
> > files as well?
I think I've declared all of the ones I wanted to be public in the featu
---
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/3180/#review4354
---
Looks good. The new interface is neat. One minor comment, please see b
