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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

馃悰 fix for "expires_at" / "expires_in" param when "None" is specified #227

merged 1 commit into from May 5, 2020

馃悰 fix for "expires_at" / "expires_in" param when "None" is specified #227

merged 1 commit into from May 5, 2020


Copy link

@stefanitsky stefanitsky commented May 3, 2020

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update
  • Refactor
  • Other, please describe:

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

Some providers provide endless access tokens, therefore, if you specify None for expires_at or expires_in - a token initialization error occurs.

For example, such services are GitHub and Gitlab. Moreover, in the case of the Gitlab, the token for updating is returned, but without expires_at (long-live bug and it won't be fixed, probably).


  • You consent that the copyright of your pull request source code belongs to Authlib's author.

@stefanitsky stefanitsky changed the title 馃悰 fix for "expires_at" / "expires_in" param when "None" is specified 馃悰 fix for "expires_at" / "expires_in" param when "None" is specified May 3, 2020
@lepture lepture merged commit 86231c3 into lepture:master May 5, 2020
1 check passed
Copy link

lepture commented May 5, 2020


Copy link

fboudra commented May 16, 2020

Does it mean we can implement like Gitlab/Doorkeeper is doing and use authlib/OAuth 2 server to provide a custom access token expiration (endless)?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
None yet
None yet

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants