-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
sources/ldap: add forward deletion option #14718
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
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for authentik-docs canceled.
|
✅ Deploy Preview for authentik-storybook canceled.
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #14718 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 92.75% 92.79% +0.04%
==========================================
Files 814 816 +2
Lines 41905 42107 +202
==========================================
+ Hits 38869 39074 +205
+ Misses 3036 3033 -3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
0feeecb
to
cc08ad7
Compare
cc08ad7
to
8f3de8d
Compare
8f3de8d
to
25f4eb7
Compare
authentik/sources/ldap/sync/base.py
Outdated
def get_identifier(self, object): | ||
attributes = object.get("attributes", {}) | ||
if not attributes.get(self._source.object_uniqueness_field): | ||
return | ||
return flatten(attributes[self._source.object_uniqueness_field]) |
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.
This should also be used in other places, like authentik.sources.ldap.sync.users.UserLDAPSynchronizer.sync
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.
Yeah, maybe? I did my best, see if you like it.
I'm not sure what that additional in
check is for (untested code introduced in deb91bd -- should it be something like an isinstance(object, dict)
check instead?), but I'm not about to find out, so I did my best to keep the exact same logic for already existing code.
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.
Small nits otherwise lgtm
authentik PR Installation instructions Instructions for docker-composeAdd the following block to your AUTHENTIK_IMAGE=ghcr.io/goauthentik/dev-server
AUTHENTIK_TAG=gh-825da1b5abac38e937cc577654d847f5a18b72f4
AUTHENTIK_OUTPOSTS__CONTAINER_IMAGE_BASE=ghcr.io/goauthentik/dev-%(type)s:gh-%(build_hash)s Afterwards, run the upgrade commands from the latest release notes. Instructions for KubernetesAdd the following block to your authentik:
outposts:
container_image_base: ghcr.io/goauthentik/dev-%(type)s:gh-%(build_hash)s
global:
image:
repository: ghcr.io/goauthentik/dev-server
tag: gh-825da1b5abac38e937cc577654d847f5a18b72f4 Afterwards, run the upgrade commands from the latest release notes. |
I don't know what that additional `in` check is for, but I'm not about to find out.
Closes #1644
Checklist
ak test authentik/
)make lint-fix
)If an API change has been made
make gen-build
)If changes to the frontend have been made
make web
)If applicable
make website
)