Skip to content

chore!: regenerate stubs for id-only DeleteUser - #2

Merged
lakhansamani merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/regen-delete-user-id
Aug 7, 2026
Merged

chore!: regenerate stubs for id-only DeleteUser#2
lakhansamani merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/regen-delete-user-id

Conversation

@lakhansamani

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Regenerated via ./scripts/generate.sh from BSR after authorizerdev/authorizer#753 landed and the schema was published. No hand-edits.

Change

DeleteUserRequest loses email and gains id. Verified against the built descriptor rather than by reading the diff:

>>> [f.name for f in admin_pb2.DeleteUserRequest.DESCRIPTOR.fields]
['id']

Plus the DeleteUser docstring in admin_pb2_grpc.py.

Email is not an identifier every account has — a phone-only signup has none — so an email-keyed delete could not reach those accounts at all.

BREAKING

DeleteUserRequest(email=...) no longer works; use DeleteUserRequest(id=...). Requires server 2.4.0+.

Field 1 is reserved rather than reused: both fields are strings, so reusing tag 1 would let an old client's email decode silently as an id — wire-compatible, semantically wrong, on a delete path.

Version

Bumped 0.2.0rc00.2.0rc1, matching this repo's convention of bumping in the regeneration commit. The break lands inside the still-unreleased 0.2.0 RC line.

⚠️ Worth a maintainer decision: authorizer-python pins authorizer-proto>=0.2.0rc0 — a floating minimum with no upper bound, so it will pick this breaking release up automatically. The companion SDK PR handles the call-site change, but the loose pin means version skew is not actually prevented by the dependency spec.

Pulled from BSR via scripts/generate.sh after authorizerdev/authorizer#753.
DeleteUserRequest.email is replaced by id; proto field 1 is reserved rather
than reused, so an old client's email cannot silently decode as an id on a
delete.

BREAKING CHANGE: DeleteUserRequest.email is removed; use id. Requires server
2.4.0+.
@lakhansamani
lakhansamani merged commit 8e71c1d into main Aug 7, 2026
3 checks passed
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.

1 participant