Skip to content

More token fetching - #24848

Open
NobodysNightmare wants to merge 4 commits into
devfrom
more-token-fetching
Open

More token fetching#24848
NobodysNightmare wants to merge 4 commits into
devfrom
more-token-fetching

Conversation

@NobodysNightmare

@NobodysNightmare NobodysNightmare commented Aug 20, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This is a continuation of #24726, targeting dev. It uses the newly introduced TokenFetcher in more places and removes a few unused methods that were directly dealing with OAuthClientToken, but didn't have any callers anymore.

Tickets

https://community.openproject.org/wp/SI-238

@NobodysNightmare
NobodysNightmare marked this pull request as draft August 20, 2026 07:20
@NobodysNightmare
NobodysNightmare changed the base branch from oauth-client-tokens to dev August 20, 2026 07:20
The method was intended to obtain an access token, but its
only usage was to check for the presence of a user-connection.

It has been replaced appropriately.
There was a capability to refresh access tokens, including
a try-and-error method to perform a code block and retry it
with a refreshed token. However, both were not used at all.
@NobodysNightmare
NobodysNightmare requested a review from a team August 21, 2026 06:16
@NobodysNightmare
NobodysNightmare marked this pull request as ready for review August 21, 2026 06:16
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ See COPYRIGHT and LICENSE files for more details.
%>

<%# TODO: temp — move to a dedicated per-user connection status component once designed %>

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This joke doesn't get old xD

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning

Flaky specs

  • rspec ./spec/features/work_packages/table/switch_types_spec.rb[1:1:1]
🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24848, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./spec/features/work_packages/table/switch_types_spec.rb[1:1:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24848. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24848 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @NobodysNightmare to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @NobodysNightmare, and request a review from @NobodysNightmare.
On every commit, set @NobodysNightmare as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant