Feature: add support for adding authorization #14
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
horike37
approved these changes
Aug 15, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@erezrokah
Thank you for implementing this 👍 It works and the code looks good from my perspective.
If authorizationType is set to CUSTOM I'm not creating the authorizer resource (If that is what you >meant in your comment to #11).
I think it might be better if one defines the authorizer explicitly, but maybe we can wait for more use >cases.
OK. This looks good for now. We would get feedback if someone want to use it.
|
🎉 This PR is included in version 1.1.0 🎉 The release is available on: Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #11
Note to @horike37 :
If
authorizationTypeis set toCUSTOMI'm not creating the authorizer resource (If that is what you meant in your comment to #11).I think it might be better if one defines the authorizer explicitly, but maybe we can wait for more use cases.
I'm actually using
AWS_IAM(I wrote a plugin before noticing this one exists...).