Add SourceHut (sr.ht) provider #2359
Conversation
providers/srht.go
Outdated
| s.Email = email | ||
|
|
||
| username, err := json.Get("data").Get("me").Get("username").String() | ||
| if err == nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So errors / missing usernames are going to be ignored? Shouldn't we at least log something?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You're right, not sure what I had in mind there. I made it a hard error, for if a response is received but it does not contain a username, something is certainly amiss.
|
As I just learned from #2357 I guess I should add an item to the Changelog. However, to avoid a merge conflict, I'll wait until you merged that one, so I can rebase this branch. |
|
Hi @bitfehler does sourcehut only offer a oauth2 integration or oidc as well? |
There is no OIDC right now. |
|
Added a changelog, now that the potentially conflicting branch was merged. Let me know if there is anything else I was missing! |
Thanks for the clarification. I'll check the code once more when I find the time. Probably on the weekend. |
bitfehler
force-pushed
the
srht
branch
2 times, most recently
from
521b961 to
bb0a911
Compare
|
Fixed the outstanding CI failures, sorry for the delay. |
|
This pull request has been inactive for 60 days. If the pull request is still relevant please comment to re-activate the pull request. If no action is taken within 7 days, the pull request will be marked closed. |
|
@tuunit gentle ping 🙂 |
|
This pull request has been inactive for 60 days. If the pull request is still relevant please comment to re-activate the pull request. If no action is taken within 7 days, the pull request will be marked closed. |
|
This pull request has been inactive for 60 days. If the pull request is still relevant please comment to re-activate the pull request. If no action is taken within 7 days, the pull request will be marked closed. |
Co-authored-by: Jan Larwig <[email protected]>
Description
This adds a provider for SourceHut instances, defaulting to the main public instance at sr.ht, but custom instances can be used by overriding the usual URLs (see added documentation).
Motivation and Context
Full disclosure: I am affiliated with SourceHut. Nevertheless, I'd simply like to use oauth2-proxy with sr.ht accounts for one of my projects, and I think others might benefit from this as well.
How Has This Been Tested?
I have tested this against both the public instance as well as a local development instance.
Checklist:
I added documentation, not sure about the Changelog. Let me know if you'd like me to put something in there...