-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
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
fix: LTI 1.3 extra claims and custom parameters #392
fix: LTI 1.3 extra claims and custom parameters #392
Conversation
Thanks for the pull request, @kuipumu! Please note that it may take us up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR. Feel free to add as much of the following information to the ticket as you can:
All technical communication about the code itself will be done via the GitHub pull request interface. As a reminder, our process documentation is here. Please let us know once your PR is ready for our review and all tests are green. |
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #392 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 97.91% 97.94% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 77 77
Lines 6475 6555 +80
==========================================
+ Hits 6340 6420 +80
Misses 135 135
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
@kuipumu It looks like there's a coverage decrease that needs attention. |
@e0d I just added a commit to include a test to cover the missing lines, please let me know if there is any other improvement that should be added to the tests |
Hi @openedx/masters-devs-cosmonauts! Would someone be able to please review/merge this for us? Thank you! |
@kuipumu This looks good but I think we should include some documentation on the new custom params. At minimum adding similar setup instructions to the /docs folder in this repo would be a great help. It's a small feature but I wouldn't want knowledge of how to use this to get lost in just the PR description here. |
@zacharis278 I was about to add documentation about this feature but I noticed there is already documentation about these features on the docs/developing.rst document, do you think there is anything else about the feature that should be remarked on that document?, the feature is still the same, this PR only includes a fix for these features to work on LTI 1.3, this also includes a minor improvement to the validation of the custom parameters field on the XBlock. |
ahh thankyou I hadn't noticed it was already there. That seems like to wrong doc for this to me but that's not your problem. |
@kuipumu this does look good can you add the init.py and changelog entries for the new version? With those added I can merge this in. |
Co-authored-by: Javier Torres <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Squirrel18 <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: alexjmpb <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: anfbermudezme <[email protected]>
b8b3728
to
2c04bcc
Compare
@zacharis278 I just updated the changelog and the version of the package. |
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.
tested locally and this is working as expected 👍
Thanks!
@kuipumu 🎉 Your pull request was merged! Please take a moment to answer a two question survey so we can improve your experience in the future. |
Description
This PR adds a feature that allows the LTI consumer XBlock to send custom parameters (including dynamic custom parameters) and extra claims to LTI 1.3 launches.
Type of Change
Testing: