-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 362
feat: Add Retry-After HTTP header to lockout responses
#1401
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’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Open
rodrigobnogueira
wants to merge
8
commits into
jazzband:master
Choose a base branch
from
rodrigobnogueira:feature/retry-after-header
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
c9563bc
feat: Add `Retry-After` HTTP header to lockout responses when `AXES_C…
ef91ba9
style: apply black formatting
a9e9704
refactor: handle Retry-After in middleware with opt-in setting
rodrigobnogueira 359843c
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into feature/retry-aft…
rodrigobnogueira 0513231
style: restore spacing in test_helpers
rodrigobnogueira 4f5bfb8
refactor: update Retry-After header handling in AxesMiddleware and tests
rodrigobnogueira 1c678ec
Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into feature/retry-aft…
rodrigobnogueira fd78bdf
Fix py314-djqa CI checks
rodrigobnogueira File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wouldl it make sense to just write this as a simpler single if-then method? Why do we need to skip setting the header on callable and lockout URLs?
I think a better location for this function could be the
axes.helpersmodule since it contains other similar implementations for getters and this can be just a generic function (although it is quite middleware-ish since it uses bothresponseandrequestobjects).Since this method actually mutates the response object without copying it it should probably just set the header, no need to return a new object really:
Then it can just be simply invoked here or maybe even preferably in
axes.helpers.get_lockout_responsewhere it could live in one place instead of multiple:This is easier to use and simple to test.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done. It is simpler now. thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Let me know if the implementation is better now.