Skip to content

FirebaseServerApp #366

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

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 13, 2024
Merged

FirebaseServerApp #366

merged 8 commits into from
Mar 13, 2024

Conversation

jamesdaniels
Copy link
Member

@jamesdaniels jamesdaniels commented Mar 11, 2024

  • Move over to using auth/service-worker-sessions.js
  • Get things compiling
  • Simplify the SW code will do this in a follow on
  • Remove @ts-expect-error when api has landed

There is no compat version of this API.

API proposal: go/fb-web-firebaseserverapp
WIP impl: firebase/firebase-js-sdk#8005
WIP docs: cl/607423524

Trying to keep it simple for now, matching the behavior of the current Admin SDK snippet in the docs—which wasn't in this repo, addressing here.

Existing snippets:

  • auth(-next)/server-worker-sessions.js
    • auth_svc_register
    • auth_svc_sign_in_email
    • auth_svc_listen_activate
    • auth_svc_intercept
    • auth_svc_subscribe
    • auth_svc_get_idtoken

New snippets:

  • auth/server-worker-sessions.js
    • auth_svc_admin
  • firebaseserverapp-next/firebaseserverapp.js
    • serverapp_auth

Copy link

@DellaBitta DellaBitta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you have changes to the client service worker, too?

@jamesdaniels
Copy link
Member Author

@DellaBitta no changes strictly needed as the current code in service-worker-sessions.js#auth_svc_intercept works fine. I'm working to simplify though.

@DellaBitta
Copy link

Got it, thanks!

@jamesdaniels jamesdaniels marked this pull request as ready for review March 13, 2024 19:34
Copy link
Contributor

@egilmorez egilmorez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with a few nits from the related CL, thanks James!

@jamesdaniels jamesdaniels requested a review from egilmorez March 13, 2024 20:09
Copy link
Contributor

@egilmorez egilmorez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@egilmorez egilmorez merged commit a9160f6 into master Mar 13, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants