Move `user_identities` into `custom_claims`
What does this MR do and why?
Move user_identities
into custom_claims
reserved_claims
should be kept only to the 7 specified claims.
https://auth0.com/docs/secure/tokens/json-web-tokens/json-web-token-claims#registered-claims
Screenshots or screen recordings
Screenshots are required for UI changes, and strongly recommended for all other merge requests.
Before | After |
---|---|
How to set up and validate locally
Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.
MR acceptance checklist
This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
-
I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.
Merge request reports
Activity
assigned to @alberts-gitlab
- Resolved by Erick Bajao
- A deleted user
added backend label
2 Warnings There were no new or modified feature flag YAML files detected in this MR. If the changes here are already controlled under an existing feature flag, please add
the feature flagexists. Otherwise, if you think the changes here don't need
to be under a feature flag, please add the label feature flagskipped, and
add a short comment about why we skipped the feature flag.For guidance on when to use a feature flag, please see the documentation.
There were no new or modified SaaS feature YAML files detected in this MR. For guidance on when to use a SaaS feature, please see the SaaS feature documentation.
Reviewer roulette
Changes that require review have been detected!
Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:
Category Reviewer Maintainer backend mallocke
(UTC+13, 5 hours ahead of
@alberts-gitlab
)felipe_artur
(UTC-3, 11 hours behind
@alberts-gitlab
)~"Verify" Reviewer review is optional for ~"Verify" allison.browne
(UTC-4, 12 hours behind
@alberts-gitlab
)Please check reviewer's status!
Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.
To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.
Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.
If needed, you can retry the
danger-review
job that generated this comment.Generated by
Danger- Resolved by Erick Bajao
@iamricecake could you review please?
added maintenancerefactor label
requested review from @iamricecake
added typemaintenance label
changed milestone to %16.5
Allure report
allure-report-publisher
generated test report!e2e-test-on-gdk:
test report for 79b7b88cexpand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Plan | 51 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 51 | ✅ | | Create | 32 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 37 | ✅ | | Govern | 45 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 45 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 18 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 20 | ✅ | | Verify | 8 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 8 | ✅ | | Manage | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 154 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 162 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
Setting label grouppipeline security based on
@alberts-gitlab
's group.added grouppipeline security label
Setting label(s) devopsverify sectionci based on grouppipeline security.
added devopsverify sectionci labels
@iamricecake
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request has been approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.
For more info, please refer to the following links:
added pipeline:mr-approved label
enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 0604af51 succeeds
@alberts-gitlab Some end-to-end (E2E) tests should run based on the stage label.
Please start the
trigger-omnibus-and-follow-up-e2e
job in theqa
stage and ensure tests in thefollow-up-e2e:package-and-test-ee
pipeline pass before this MR is merged. (E2E tests are computationally intensive and don't run automatically for every push/rebase, so we ask you to run this job manually at least once.)To run all E2E tests, apply the pipeline:run-all-e2e label and run a new pipeline.
E2E test jobs are allowed to fail due to flakiness. See current failures at the latest pipeline triage issue.
Once done, apply the
emoji on this comment.Team members only: for any questions or help, reach out on the internal
#quality
Slack channel.changed milestone to %16.6
added missed:16.5 label
@iamricecake, did you forget to run a pipeline before you merged this work? Based on our code review process, if the latest pipeline was created more than 6 hours ago OR finished more than 2 hours ago, you should:
- Ensure the merge request is not in Draft status.
- Start a pipeline (especially important for Community contribution merge requests).
- Set the merge request to auto-merge.
This is a guideline, not a rule. Please consider replying to this comment for transparency.
This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
mentioned in commit c5b0fa10
added workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label
added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label
added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label
added releasedcandidate label