App access tokens #119

Closed
opened 2020-06-03 16:27:52 +00:00 by 6543 · 5 comments
Member

If you log on and off multible times, for example to switch betwen instances or for testing ...

each logon a new token is created instead of using the old one or delete the old one ...

If you log on and off multible times, for example to switch betwen instances or for testing ... each logon a new token is created instead of using the old one or delete the old one ... ![](https://cloud.obermui.de/apps/gallery/preview.public/1475266?width=2000&height=2000&c=69d4f04a14d835cb06a5e59abd6fcf13&requesttoken=4d%2B4vsboMCbjaZPhXl35u%2FcKrtug7DhRlf1%2FzM9j7%2BU%3D%3AqrjZ%2Bo6cZmW7EfatLTqPg7ln4bzapGIJxYcdnuQHl4A%3D&token=dDTcCcrJfGy3KcK)
6543 added this to the 2.3.0 milestone 2020-06-03 16:27:52 +00:00
6543 added the
🪒 Refactor
label 2020-06-03 16:27:52 +00:00
6543 closed this issue 2020-06-03 16:27:52 +00:00
mmarif was assigned by 6543 2020-06-03 16:28:32 +00:00
Owner

Each login will not create new token but each new installation will.

Also there are times when the app can be used in multiple devices, so it's risky to delete other tokens.

But I am open to ideas on this.

Each login will not create new token but each new installation will. Also there are times when the app can be used in multiple devices, so it's risky to delete other tokens. But I am open to ideas on this.
Author
Member

I'll leave it for later
when multi instance function is implemented we can look at this again?

I'll leave it for later when multi instance function is implemented we can look at this again?
Owner

Yes, we can leave it for later.

Actually before implementing this, I thought many times and considered many scenarios for deleting tokens. But then I dropped that idea for many other reasons(like one above).

Yes, we can leave it for later. Actually before implementing this, I thought many times and considered many scenarios for deleting tokens. But then I dropped that idea for many other reasons(like one above).
Owner

It's time to revisit this issue after merging #179 .

I feel a clean refactor is needed to reduce the tokens created.

It's time to revisit this issue after merging #179 . I feel a clean refactor is needed to reduce the tokens created.
Owner

Closed via #202

Closed via #202
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Milestone
No project
No Assignees
2 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: gitnex/GitNex#119
No description provided.