-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 808
Allow loopback redirect URIs using ports as described in RFC8252 #953
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
rtpg
merged 8 commits into
django-oauth:master
from
pauldekkers:fix/loopback-redirect-uri
Apr 12, 2021
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
679b00a
Allow loopback redirect URIs using ports as described in RFC8252
pauldekkers 32e618d
Update Changelog and Authors
pauldekkers 6be055f
Docs update and adjustment for explicit port config on loopback
pauldekkers 31f3ca4
Wrap and clarify Changelog
pauldekkers a410883
Clarify documentation
pauldekkers 659e1a9
Split out redirect uri logic for easier testing
rtpg bdaead2
Merge branch 'master' into fix/loopback-redirect-uri
auvipy 947a83d
Merge branch 'master' into fix/loopback-redirect-uri
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
at first it looks like both of these branches could be merged! And for
scheme
andpath
it can, butnetloc
is actually inclusive of the port (it's roughly login info + hostname + port) , and for loopback IPs we don't want to be requiring the port to be the same (the whole point is wanting to support ephemeral IPs)