Support use of MISSING throughout the BaseAuthClient and its variants #1228
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sirosen
requested review from
aaschaer,
ada-globus,
derek-globus,
kurtmckee,
m1yag1 and
MaxTueckeGlobus
as code owners
Co-authored-by: Stephen Rosen <[email protected]>
Also includes a minor fix for usage which was missing `strseq_listify()` usage.
- "unreachable code" due to None vs MISSING in a comparison - tests which expect None handling should expect MISSING handling - one test which tested *unsupported* values (by typing contract) has been narrowed to supported types only
sirosen
force-pushed
the
auth-missing-defaults
branch
from
89c35b2 to
92a0e00
Compare
kurtmckee
requested changes
Jun 23, 2025
tests/functional/services/auth/service_client/test_get_identities.py
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Kurt McKee <[email protected]>
kurtmckee
approved these changes
Jun 23, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This started from a body of work done by @MaxTueckeGlobus , but I rebased it and continued to tinker on it to get things ironed out as part of the improvements I delivered in #1222.
As with other conversions, many of these are "rote", simple rewrites, and a few have special nuance.
In particular, we discussed whether or not the oauth2 flow manager objects should rewrite to use MISSING or continue to use None.
I examined the parameters and made some judgement calls there, as there are fields which at least in theory a user could want to explicitly remove from an authorization URL, although there is no current practical reason to enable such usage.
Also notable: I decided not to touch the GARE components in this work. As a result, there is a new
none2missinghelper added to adapt a GARE into OAuth2 authorization inputs.📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://globus-sdk-python--1228.org.readthedocs.build/en/1228/