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

Allow backup field authorization for login & password reset #538

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

djsegal
Copy link
Contributor

@djsegal djsegal commented Feb 14, 2016

Resolves: #509
Replaces: #510


Notes:

@booleanbetrayal
Copy link
Collaborator

Will try to take a look at this in the next couple of days @djsegal.

@lynndylanhurley / @nbrustein - could probably use some more eyes on this one!

@booleanbetrayal
Copy link
Collaborator

Afraid I've been swamped @djsegal. Will try to take a look at it ASAP unless @lynndylanhurley beats me to it.

@djsegal
Copy link
Contributor Author

djsegal commented Apr 21, 2016

@booleanbetrayal any word on this? I can look into doing a rebase if you think it's worth it.

@zachfeldman
Copy link
Contributor

Hi there @djsegal ,

In an effort to cleanup this project and prioritize a bit, we're marking pull requests that haven't had any activity in a while with a "close-in-7-days" label. If we don't hear from you in about a week, we'll be closing this pull request. Obviously feel free to re-open it at any time if it's the right time or this was done in error! If you do, please rebase it with the latest master and explain why it's still needed.

We really appreciate your contribution, we're just trying to make this project manageable again to move it forward.

Hope all is well.

@djsegal
Copy link
Contributor Author

djsegal commented Oct 14, 2017

I think this is valuable enough to keep open

@lynndylanhurley
Copy link
Owner

@djsegal I apologize for the delay. Re-opening now, I'll look into this ASAP

@KelseyDH
Copy link

KelseyDH commented Jan 18, 2018

 @resource = q.find_by(provider: 'email')

Strongly recommend against any refactorings that presume or hardcore provider to be 'email.' I believe this forced coupling is an immense source of unneeded complexity within this gem that makes things very hard to change for anyone who is trying to configure this gem for use cases outside of email (like usernames or phone numbers).

@jerichoECKO
Copy link

Let's do this

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.

Allow backup field for login
7 participants