Does Firebase have any trick like { merge: true } to set extra/more custom claims without delete/override the old variables?
Step to reproduce:
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, { a: 'value' }) // Run this first
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, { b: 'value' }) // Then run this after
Result:
{ b: 'value'}
Expected result:
{ a: 'value', b: 'value' }
Or I did something wrong?
The Firebase documentation for setCustomUserClaims states:
customUserClaims: Object
The developer claims to set. If null is passed, existing custom claims are deleted. Passing a custom claims payload larger than 1000 bytes will throw an error. Custom claims are added to the user's ID token which is transmitted on every authenticated request. For profile non-access related user attributes, use database or other separate storage systems.
It isn't entirely clear from this description, but the statement, "If null is passed, existing custom claims are deleted," provides a hint that the custom claims are completely overwritten with each call to setCustomUserClaims.
Therefore, custom claims need to be set as follows:
claims = {
a: 'value',
b: 'value'
}
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, claims)
Workaround: addCustomUserClaims
A helper function could be created to merge in new claims.
async function addCustomUserClaims(uid, claims) {
const user = await admin.auth().getUser(uid)
let updated_claims = user.customClaims || {}
for (let property in claims) {
if (Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(claims, property)) {
updated_claims[property] = claims[property]
}
}
await admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, updated_claims)
}
Christopher Peisert's answer is correct, but it can be done much more cleanly as
admin.auth().getUser(uid).then(({customClaims: oldClaims}) =>
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, { ...oldClaims, b: 'value' }))
If you want to abstract this logic into a function, it can be done as
function addCustomUserClaims(uid, claims) {
return admin.auth().getUser(uid).then(({customClaims}) =>
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, { ...customClaims, ...claims }))
}
or equivalently* as
const addCustomUserClaims = (uid, claims) =>
admin.auth().getUser(uid).then(({customClaims}) =>
admin.auth().setCustomUserClaims(uid, { ...customClaims, ...claims }))
Related
Is there a way to query the results to show only data that has been published and is not in draft state? I looked in the documentation and didn't quite find it.
This is what I currently have:
export const getAllPages = async (context?) => {
const client = createClient({
space: process.env.CONTENTFUL_SPACE_ID,
accessToken: process.env.CONTENTFUL_ACCESS_TOKEN,
});
const pages = await client.getEntries({
content_type: "page",
include: 10,
"fields.slug[in]": `/${context.join().replace(",", "/")}`,
});
return pages?.items?.map((item) => {
const fields = item.fields;
return {
title: fields["title"],
};
});
};
You can detect that the entries you get are in Published state:
function isPublished(entity) {
return !!entity.sys.publishedVersion &&
entity.sys.version == entity.sys.publishedVersion + 1
}
In your case, I would look for both Published and Changed:
function isPublishedChanged(entity) {
return !!entity.sys.publishedVersion &&
entity.sys.version >= entity.sys.publishedVersion + 1
}
Check the documentation:
https://www.contentful.com/developers/docs/tutorials/general/determine-entry-asset-state/
To get only the published data you will need to use the Content Delivery API token. If you use the Content Preview API Token, you will receive both the published and draft entries.
You can read more about it here: https://www.contentful.com/developers/docs/references/content-delivery-api/
If using the Content Delivery API you need to filter on the sys.revision attribute for each item. A published item should have its revision attribute set to greater than 0.
const publishedItems = data.items.filter(item => item.sys.revision > 0)
I'm using Bot Framework SDK with nodejs to implement a disamibuation flow.
I want that if two intents predicted by Luis are close to each other, ask the user from which of them are the one they want. I have done the validator but, I have a problem with the flow.
It is a waterfall Dialog with 3 steps:
FirstStep: Calls Orchestrator and Luis to get intents and entities. It pass the data with return await step.next({...})
Disamiguation Step: Checks if it is necessary to disambiguate, and, in that case, prompts the options. If not, it pass the data like the first step.
Answer step: If it has a disambiguation flag in the data it receives in step.result, it prompts the answer acordingly with the user response. Elsewhere, it uses the data in step.result that comes from the first step.
The problem is that, when it prompts user to say the intent, I lost the data of the FirstStep since I cannot use step.next({...})
¿How can I maintain both the data from the first step and the user answer in the prompt?
Here are the basic code:
async firstStep(step) {
logger.info(`FinalAnswer Dialog: firstStep`);
let model_dispatch = await this.bot.get_intent_dispatch(step.context);
let result = await this.bot.dispatchToTopIntentAsync(step.context, model_dispatch.model)
// model_dispatch = orchestrator_model
// result = {topIntent: String, entities: Array, disamibiguation: Array}
return await step.next({ model_dispatch: model_dispatch, result: result})
}
async disambiguationStep(step) {
logger.info(`FinalAnswer Dialog: disambiguationStep`);
if (step.result.result.disambiguation) {
logger.info("We need to disambiguate")
let disambiguation_options = step.result.result.disambiguation
const message_text = "What do you need";
const data = [
{
"title": "TEXT",
"value": disambiguation_option[0]
},
{
"title": "TEXT",
"value": disambiguation_option[1]
},
]
let buttons = data.map(function (d) {
return {
type: ActionTypes.PostBack,
title: d.title,
value: d.value
}
});
const msg = MessageFactory.suggestedActions(buttons, message_text);
return await step.prompt(TEXT_PROMPT, { prompt: msg });
return step.next(step.result) //not working
}
else {
logger.info("We dont desambiguate")
return step.next(step.result)
}
}
async answerStep(step) {
logger.info(`FinalAnswer Dialog: answerStep`);
let model_dispatch = step.result.model_dispatch
let result = step.result.result
//Show answer
return await step.endDialog();
}
You can use the step dictionary to store your values. The complex dialogs sample on GitHub is excellent for demonstrating this. https://github.com/microsoft/BotBuilder-Samples/blob/main/samples/javascript_nodejs/43.complex-dialog/dialogs/topLevelDialog.js
You can save data in the context with whatever name you want:
step.values['nameProperty'] = {}
This will be accessible within the entire execution context of the waterfall dialog:
const data = step.values['nameProperty'] // {}
I am trying to get a text from an element with Cypress in the first test from the first domain and then type it in the second test in another domain, here is a code
I have to grab code from h4.
I implemented next part of code:
get studentCouponValue() {
return cy.get('h4').then(($span) => {
const couponValue = $span.text();
cy.log(couponValue);
})
}
in logs, I see the correct coupon's value, but when I am trying to type it into the field I get an error
The chain approach doesn't fit my expectation, cause i am going to use it in different tests.
Try this:
get studentCouponValue() {
return cy.get('h4').then(($span) => {
const couponValue = $span.innerText;
cy.log(couponValue);
})
}
i resolved
initStudentCouponValue() {
const self = this;
return cy.get('main > .container-fluid').find('h4').then((span) => {
self.couponValue = span.text();
cy.log('First log '+ self.couponValue);
return new Cypress.Promise((resolve) => {
return resolve(self.couponValue);
});
});
}
getStudentCouponValue() {
return this.couponValue;
}
in the test where we want to use value
let couponValue;
admin.initStudentCouponValue().then(() => {
couponValue = admin.getStudentCouponValue()
});
and later we can use
coupoValue
for inputs
I am wondering if it is possible to fetch a job by requisitionId in Google Cloud Talent Solution. requisitionId has to be unique across jobs so it seems like a natural candidate for looking a job up.
When a job is created the api returns a job name that can be used to look the job up:
You can retrieve the details of a previously inserted job by sending a GET request to the Cloud Talent Solution. The URI should include the previously inserted job name returned by the original create request, as a URL parameter.
I'd like to avoid storing these names if possible. In my view storing them adds unnecessary complexity since I already have a unique requisitionId. To be clear the API does not let you add jobs with a duplicate requisitionId:
Job projects/{my_app_id}/jobs/{google_assigned_id} already exists. Request ID for tracking: ... Related Job requisition ID: ...
So can I look up jobs by requisitionId?
I could parse the error message that's returned to get the job name..but that seems pretty brittle.
It turns out the list method takes requisitionId so for a full, read-create-update cycle we can do:
const listRequest = {
parent: `projects/${projectId}`,
'filter': `companyName="${companyName}" AND requisitionId="${requisitionId}"`
}
const listResult = await jobService.projects.jobs.list(listRequest)
const existingJobs = listResult.data.jobs || [];
let existingJob = null
if (existingJobs && existingJobs.length > 0) {
existingJob = existingJobs[0]
}
let googleJob
if (!existingJob) {
const createRequest = {
'parent': `projects/${projectId}`,
'resource': {
'job': {
companyName,
requisitionId,
title,
description,
applicationInfo: {
emails: ['email#example.com']
}
}
}
}
googleJob = await jobService.projects.jobs.create(createRequest)
.then(result => result)
.catch(resp => {
console.error("ERROR")
console.error(resp)
})
} else {
const patchRequest = {
'name': existingJob.name,
'resource': {
'job': {
companyName,
requisitionId,
title,
description,
applicationInfo: {
emails: ['email#example.com']
}
}
}
}
googleJob = await jobService.projects.jobs.patch(patchRequest)
.then(result => result)
.catch(resp => {
console.error("ERROR")
console.error(resp)
})
}
Docs: https://cloud.google.com/talent-solution/job-search/docs/reference/rest/v3/projects.jobs/list?authuser=0&hl=de
Notes:
The double quotes in the filter parameter are important. It will not accept single quotes and will give a cryptic error message.
The patch request cannot take a parent parameter even though everything else requires a parent parameter...
one can add it as custom attribute:
Map<String, CustomAttribute> attributes = new HashMap<>();
attributes
.put("requisitionId", new CustomAttribute().setStringValue(requisitionId)
.setFilterable(true));
Job job = new Job()
...
.setCustomAttributes(attributes);
Job jobCreated = createJob(job);
String jobName = jobCreated.getName();
and then search for requisitionId with a custom attribute filter:
JobQuery jobQuery = new JobQuery().setCustomAttributeFilter(filter);
this is a little redundant, but JobQuery has no method .setRequisitionId().
here's the documentation.
I need to use a WCF API to save data into a DB. Ordinarily, I'd use chaining, like the example below:
IClientBroker clientBroker = UIContext.CreateWcfInterface<IClientBroker>("Data/ClientBroker.svc");
clientBroker.BeginSetClientBusinessName(_client.ID, businessName, (result) =>
{
_client = ((IClientBroker)result.AsyncState).EndSetClientBusinessName(result);
clientBroker.BeginSetClientAddress(_client.ID, addressObservableCollection, postcodeZip, (result2) =>
{
_client = ((IClientBroker)result2.AsyncState).EndSetClientAddress(result2);
clientBroker.BeginSetClientTelephone(_client.ID, telephone, (result3) =>
{
_client = ((IClientBroker)result3.AsyncState).EndSetClientTelephone(result3);
clientBroker.BeginSetClientFax(_client.ID, fax, (result4) =>
{
_client = ((IClientBroker)result4.AsyncState).EndSetClientFax(result4);
if (customFields.Save(validationSummaryBridge))
{
CloseWindow(true, "ClientID=" + _client.ID.ToString());
}
else
{
validationSummary.Errors.Add(new ValidationSummaryItem("Failed to save Custom Fields"));
}
}, clientBroker);
}, clientBroker);
}, clientBroker);
}, clientBroker);
}
This gives me faux-synchronous behaviour which I need so exceptions are thrown in a timely fashion and I can react on validation events.
This doesn't map well, however, when I have a loop of fields to save. For example, what pattern would be best to save the following list of "Custom Fields", where each Custom Field must be saved using a single WCF call?
ICustomFieldsBroker customFieldsBroker = UIContext.CreateWcfInterface<ICustomFieldsBroker>("Data/CustomFieldsBroker.svc");
foreach (CustomField customField in _customFields)
{
string newValue=_customFieldControlDictionary[customField].CustomField.Value;
customFieldsBroker.BeginSetCustomFieldValueForItem(DataTypeID, DataItemID, customField.Key, newValue, (result) =>
{
((ICustomFieldsBroker)result.AsyncState).EndSetCustomFieldValueForItem(result);
}, customFieldsBroker);
}
In the above example, this would just set off, say, 5 requests to the WCF API/threads which would potentially return AFTER the form has closed. I need them to "line up", so I can list their status and return to the form.
Thanks very much.
Don't let the WCF distract you, but if you have any comments, do let me know. :)
This is the answer I was looking for:
http://www.netfxharmonics.com/2008/11/Understanding-WCF-Services-in-Silverlight-2#WCFSilverlightThreadWaiting