Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
feat(platform): Simplify Credentials UX #8524
feat(platform): Simplify Credentials UX #8524
Changes from 4 commits
0842f20
30fbba3
800b8e3
8fb652d
33ba822
3f54524
4d09e53
f64a0b4
f9a3993
e143754
7f4eedd
1cb3cec
c2a9ef7
32bc04b
58d01e1
9f0e386
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Just a note: this really has to be considered a tempfix. Scopes are provider-specific. So is
supported_credential_types
. TheCredentialsField
was made to handle credentials from a specific provider. If a block supports multiple providers, the discrimination logic should be handled outside theCredentialsField
.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.
See also #8524 (comment)
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'd like to leave this discussion here for reference in the follow-up PR)
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.
Okay, I'm happy for us to merge this as a much needed temp hotfix and we can adjust that in a follow up.
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.
What's the purpose of this? This whole chain of logic seems questionably necessary.
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.
Reading through this PR, I don't really see why this shortcut is being taken. What's the big hurdle preventing the regular credentials input from working on a multi-provider block?
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'm not sure I understand @Pwuts. The purpose of this code is to choose the only one existing credentials and then not show dropdown at all. I simplified this code.
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.
My question is: would it break anything to allow users the choice of adding their own API key? I understand this will be resolved in a follow-up PR, but I don't immediately see what would break right now if you still showed the credentials picker in all cases.