Update createapplication command

[vector-kerr]

Fixes #
N/A

Description of the Change

Greetings!

This pull request updates the createapplication management command.

• The --algorighm parameter is added which allows specification of "", "RS256", or "HS256"
• The --skip-authorization help text is fixed
  • It was previously incorrectly described as "The ID of the new application"
  • It is now described as "If set, completely bypass the authorization form, even on the first use of the application"

Notes:

• Documentation not updated because:
  • the command does not appear to be included in documentation
  • the command is self-documented (arguments and help strings displayed on invocation)

I hope you find this change useful!
- Daniel.

Checklist

• PR only contains one change (considered splitting up PR)
• unit-test added
• documentation updated
• CHANGELOG.md updated (only for user relevant changes)
• author name in AUTHORS

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1132 (294531c) into master (a62195b) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1132   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.86%   96.87%           
=======================================
  Files          31       31           
  Lines        1789     1790    +1     
=======================================
+ Hits         1733     1734    +1     
  Misses         56       56           

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
..._provider/management/commands/createapplication.py	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a62195b...294531c. Read the comment docs.

[n2ygk]

Hey, thanks for this!

Would you consider adding something to the docs for this command? It's never a bad thing to improve the documentation.

[vector-kerr]

@n2ygk Sure thing, I've had a go at it in commit de0db70.

I'm definitely not an expert on RST documentation (much more familiar and comfortable with markdown) but I gave it a shot.

Someone will probably want to read over it to make sure I haven't buggered it up. I checked it in VSCode with an RST plugin and it seems ok, but I can't be certain.

- Daniel

[n2ygk]

@n2ygk Sure thing, I've had a go at it in commit de0db70.

I'm definitely not an expert on RST documentation (much more familiar and comfortable with markdown) but I gave it a shot.

I think most of us prefer markdown.

Someone will probably want to read over it to make sure I haven't buggered it up. I checked it in VSCode with an RST plugin and it seems ok, but I can't be certain.

To see what your docs edit looks like, you can locally run tox -e docs and then open docs/_build/html/index.html to see how it looks. You can similarly click on the Details for this check: docs/readthedocs.org:django-oauth-toolkit — Read the Docs build succeeded!

[n2ygk]

Weirdly the docs build failed even though it works locally.... I'll have to dig a bit further on that.

[n2ygk]

Weirdly the docs build failed even though it works locally.... I'll have to dig a bit further on that.

This project's tox setup doesn't refresh the .tox cache properly. After rm -r .tox/docs I can reproduce the error.

[n2ygk]

Weirdly the docs build failed even though it works locally.... I'll have to dig a bit further on that.

This project's tox setup doesn't refresh the .tox cache properly. After rm -r .tox/docs I can reproduce the error.

Unrelated problem: sphinx-doc/sphinx#10291 fixed in #1134.

[vector-kerr]

Hello again @n2ygk,

I've just merged the master branch into my topical which I presume adds the version pin for jinja2.
If there's anything else you need from my end please let me know. :)

- Daniel

[n2ygk]

Hello again @n2ygk,

I've just merged the master branch into my topical which I presume adds the version pin for jinja2. If there's anything else you need from my end please let me know. :)

• Daniel

Yeah I'll make sure to resync it with master as there are a few PRs in flight right now. Please either accept or reject the documentation suggestion I made w.r.t table vs. output of manage.py createapplication --help.

Thanks!

[vector-kerr]

Please either accept or reject the documentation suggestion I made w.r.t table vs. output of manage.py createapplication --help.

Hello again @n2ygk,

Sorry to be a pain, but I don't seem to be able to find the documentation suggestion you're referring to.

GitHub shows me a big red "1 change requested" alert in this conversation, but when I click through with the "View changes" button, it just takes me to the review page where there are no unresolved review requests (that I can see). I also cannot see any obvious difference to the management_commands.rst documentation file that you might have made in the diff.

I do use GitLab a lot more than GitHub so I may also just not be looking in the right place...

I'm happy to look over it, I just can't seem to get to it!

[n2ygk]

Sorry. I keep doing this. I left my suggestion Pending.

[vector-kerr]

Sorry. I keep doing this. I left my suggestion Pending.

Not a problem!
Just committed your suggestion, so I think we're good to go.
Can I please get you to run the workflows once more? (I can't do it myself as a first-time contributor.)
Thanks for your patience and help!

- Daniel