MI-121: Updates the "generateMeshToken" function to return a "custome…#39
Conversation
…r_id" property instead of "bc_customer_id". Updates the "getBcCustomerIdFromMeshToken" function to look for a "customer_id" property instead of "bc_customer_id".
brettcutt-aligent
requested review from
alan-chen-aligent,
michael-west-aligent and
tvhees
|
looks good to me.~! approved. |
michael-west-aligent
left a comment
michael-west-aligent
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
comment explains the change, linked ticket.
v good
|
I don't think this is a patch version change? Presumably it breaks any code relying on I would expect this to be v1.1.0, returning both customer_id and bc_customer_id (with a deprecation) for backwards compatibility. I'm not sure if we did this with the auth module either though. Other than that - looks like a formatting issue is blocking the merge. |
Update the getBcCustomerIdFromMeshToken function to look for a bc_customer_id but comment as deprected to make the fix backwards compatible.
@tvhees I've made updates so it backwards compatible and marked it as 1.1.0. I just branched this one off the main branch. Should I be instead branching off branch version/bigcommerce-1.1.0? I had a look at the release process https://aligent.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/MG/pages/3074719963/Graphql+Mesh+Module+Release+Process. I understand creating a feature/fix PR to a version branch but not so sure I understand creating fix/feature PR to the main branch as well. Wouldn't that mean the main branch has no version control? |
|
Looks like all open PR's are failing on the same code quality issue |
|
@brettcutt-aligent I might not be understanding your question correctly but you just need to create another PR that targets the version branch |
In there current situation a version/bigcommerce-1.1.0 branch exists but lets as say a hyperthetical version/bigcommerce-2.1.0 branch exists. Following the documentation. If I want to make a bug fix on 1.0.0 I shouldn't be branching off the main branch because that would be at version 2. If I'm building on top of a version, shouldn't I be branching off that same version branch and not main? |
|
@brettcutt-aligent @TheOrangePuff should we revisit this or close it? Is the code quality step the only blocker? |
4 participants
The Auth module had been updated to generate an auth JWT containing a generic "customer_id" property rather than one named "bc_customer_id". This had an undesired affect when the Auth module was used in the BigCommerce module because the function that decodes the auth JWT looks for a "bc_customer_id" property which no longer existed. The BigCommerce module is being updated to also have a generic naming convention so the "bc_customer_id" property is now named "customer_id".