-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
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: Add minimal client implementation for auth services #76
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
from . import models | ||
|
||
|
||
class AuthClient(BaseClient): |
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.
Naming this AccessControlClient
makes it intuitive and clubs the related feature across multiple services under the same client.
@mure, @spanglerco, @cameronwaterman - please share your thoughts
627888a
to
5d0f4bf
Compare
5d0f4bf
to
ad7e3f0
Compare
5e854a2
to
b6b1c51
Compare
b6b1c51
to
bfd9308
Compare
Most of this functionality seems pretty core to the fundamental operations. Would it make more sense to bake this into a base class shared across the various APIs instead of having an explicit API just for this? |
What does this Pull Request accomplish?
This PR adds some client methods for auth endpoints and testing for these endpoints.
Why should this Pull Request be merged?
This Minimal client for auth APIs will enable users to more easily interact with that APIs.
What testing has been done?
Auto testing is included against NI's test tier.
API Link: Swagger-link