Fix the socialite provider after they pushed a revert #178
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
less than an hour ago the Socialite repository maintainers have reverted their previous PR that created a breaking change on how authentication is handled to the token endpoint. This broke the previous PR I did to fix the 500 error on our side. Now we have a 401 error because the Authentication header is missing.
I created an issue on their repo yesterday about the breaking change, they dismissed it saying they did not maintain our provider (no shit) and closed the issue (so I created the PR here to fix the issue because they would'nt fix it on their repo) and the next day another guy says he has an issue and suddenly the change is reverted... Blows my mind.
Anyway, I tested this one on my local docker env and it works. I basically reimplemented their previous change because it is more in line with the OAuth RFC to use the auth header to send clientId/clientSecret.