Repository navigation
docs: propose composing Google products through one identity - #103
Draft
TheAngryPit wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
TheAngryPit wants to merge 1 commit into
TheAngryPit wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
When composing several Google products in one Executor app, separate product definitions should not force a separate connection requirement for the same Google identity.
This draft adds a composition proposal linked to #102. It uses the existing
curated/google.jsoninterfaces and scopes rather than introducing another schema. It explains the separate responsibilities of catalog declarations, hosted-client policy, granted consent and product-specific prerequisites.This PR changes documentation only. It does not install the tested app composition, change scopes, edit generated specifications or alter account selections. Please confirm whether this catalog contract is sufficient and where the app-source delta should be contributed. Executor's public
v2infrastructure identifiesexecutor-appsas the official feed publisher, but that repository is not accessible through my current account.The proposal records results from a separately tested installed copy: strict TypeScript, 80 focused synthetic tests with 917 assertions, SDK account-binding checks, and 22/24 live read-only calls across four reauthorized accounts. Ads customer discovery returned HTTP 401 for two accounts; the cause is unresolved. These are prototype results, not tests runnable from or runtime behavior introduced by this documentation-only diff, and not full GOG parity. No private accounts, credentials or raw logs are included.
Validation for this diff: relative source links and whitespace checks passed. No runtime tests were run for the documentation-only change. No catalog records or generator output changed, so the batch catalog audit was not run.
This is adjacent to #85/#86, which handle per-operation accepted scopes; it does not replace that work. Host-side discussion: UsefulSoftwareCo/executor#2492. Part of #102; it does not close that issue.
The companion app-adoption proposal is available on the contributor's Executor branch. Creating its upstream PR was rejected by GitHub's
CreatePullRequestpermission check. It therefore has no upstream PR URL yet; neither proposal changes host runtime behavior.