Skip to content
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

Add requireAntiforgeryCheck parameter to MapBffReverseProxy() #84

Conversation

andrerav
Copy link

@andrerav andrerav commented Mar 9, 2022

What issue does this PR address?

See issue #81.

Important: Any code or remarks in your Pull Request are under the following terms:

If You provide us with any comments, bug reports, feedback, enhancements, or modifications proposed or suggested by You for the Software, such Feedback is provided on a non-confidential basis (notwithstanding any notice to the contrary You may include in any accompanying communication), and Licensor shall have the right to use such Feedback at its discretion, including, but not limited to the incorporation of such suggested changes into the Software. You hereby grant Licensor a perpetual, irrevocable, transferable, sublicensable, nonexclusive license under all rights necessary to incorporate and use your Feedback for any purpose, including to make and sell any products and services.

(see our license, section 7)

…ension method and propagate it to the AsBffApiEndpoint() method.
@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member

Thanks - but do you really needs that "convenience" method - knowing that it really only saves you 1 line of code?

@andrerav
Copy link
Author

I would definitely call this a "nice to have", not "need to have". It improves the brevity of the API, and nothing more. If you think this is superfluous or somehow detracts from the API it tries to improve then I'm perfectly fine with rejecting this PR and closing the associated issue.

@leastprivilege leastprivilege self-assigned this Mar 14, 2022
@leastprivilege
Copy link
Member

It's OK - I think in hindsight I regret adding this method at all ;) But yea - for consistency it makes sense.

thanks!

@leastprivilege leastprivilege merged commit bd25c68 into DuendeSoftware:main Mar 15, 2022
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.

2 participants