Skip to content
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

TimeFunc being static prevents from using this package in a parallel test #188

Closed
jsgoupil opened this issue Mar 29, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #236
Closed

TimeFunc being static prevents from using this package in a parallel test #188

jsgoupil opened this issue Mar 29, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #236

Comments

@jsgoupil
Copy link

I tried to bring this TimeFunc on the ParserOptions, then pass it in the Claims
But I just saw a recent retraction of something very similar.

#184

So, I would believe you will not accept a PR like mine until v5, but having the TimeFunc() local makes more sense for testing

jsgoupil@a6c0c03

I hope you can consider this bug for a future release.

@mfridman
Copy link
Member

mfridman commented May 6, 2022

Thanks for opening this issue and linking to the PR.

I suggest keeping it open (maybe adding a /v5 label) so we make sure to consider it if/when thinking through what a future release would look like.

@oxisto oxisto mentioned this issue Aug 27, 2022
5 tasks
@oxisto
Copy link
Collaborator

oxisto commented Feb 17, 2023

I tried to bring this TimeFunc on the ParserOptions, then pass it in the Claims But I just saw a recent retraction of something very similar.

#184

So, I would believe you will not accept a PR like mine until v5, but having the TimeFunc() local makes more sense for testing

jsgoupil@a6c0c03

I hope you can consider this bug for a future release.

Did you by any chance have a look at the v5 branch. I added a feature that hopefully solves your issue here:
https://github.com/golang-jwt/jwt/pull/234/files#diff-72f644d282bce7e136d0f762de1b9d5f3e447bfa88e5e0c4974ac2479107ddc9R40-R47

@oxisto oxisto linked a pull request Feb 17, 2023 that will close this issue
5 tasks
@oxisto
Copy link
Collaborator

oxisto commented Feb 21, 2023

Fixed by #234

@oxisto oxisto closed this as completed Feb 21, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants