Allow custom storage service to have its own constructor signature #205
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
stof
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 2, 2014
Allow custom storage service to have its own constructor signature
|
@stof I tagged a new version with this and the two other minor bug fixes: |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
As @Gnucki pointed out half a year ago (/pull/163): The fact that the definition of the fos_oauth_server.storage service was asked in the extension object forbade the use of a service defined in another bundle.
Also, the FOSOAuthServerExtension sets the configured userProvider as the 4th argument of the storage service.
This doesn't make sense when using a custom storage service as it fixes the constructor signature.
This PR is a cleanup + rebase of the old PR