Skip to content
GitLab

[swift5][client] allow request cancellation and authentication flow to work together

Merged Administrator requested to merge github/fork/4brunu/fix/swift-cancellable-authentication-flow into master

Created by: 4brunu

Fixes https://github.com/OpenAPITools/openapi-generator/issues/11002

With the introduction of cancellable request on the swift generator, it broke the authentication flow and this PR tries to fix that.

Instead of returning the URLSessionTask, we return a class of ours, OpenAPIRequestCancellable, and the users may call the cancel method of OpenAPIRequestCancellable.

There is one OpenAPIRequestCancellable instance per request.

On the other hand, the URLSessionImplementations/AlamofireImplementations save the current request, URLSessionTask in case of URLSession or Request in case of Alamofire, in the OpenAPIRequestCancellable so that the request can be later on cancelled.

In case there is a retry of the request, we save the new URLSessionTask in the current request, so that the new request can be cancelled.

PR checklist

  • Read the contribution guidelines.
  • Pull Request title clearly describes the work in the pull request and Pull Request description provides details about how to validate the work. Missing information here may result in delayed response from the community.
  • Run the following to build the project and update samples: 
    ./mvnw clean package 
./bin/generate-samples.sh
./bin/utils/export_docs_generators.sh
    Commit all changed files. This is important, as CI jobs will verify all generator outputs of your HEAD commit as it would merge with master. These must match the expectations made by your contribution. You may regenerate an individual generator by passing the relevant config(s) as an argument to the script, for example ./bin/generate-samples.sh bin/configs/java*. For Windows users, please run the script in Git BASH.
  • File the PR against the correct branch: master (5.3.0), 6.0.x
  • If your PR is targeting a particular programming language, @mention the technical committee members, so they are more likely to review the pull request.

@jgavris (2017/07) @ehyche (2017/08) @Edubits (2017/09) @jaz-ah (2017/09) @4brunu (2019/11)