Add Node.js part to Outbound Authentication#2596
Conversation
PDT42
left a comment
PDT42
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps this guide should use the Java / Node.js switch, if that is still a thing? The examples and required steps seem pretty disconnected.
It's not a thing anymore. But code groups that have Java/Node are now remembered by selection without the toggle. |
PDT42
left a comment
PDT42
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am still having trouble with the structure: I think intermixing the Java and Node.js guides like this doesn't provide much benefit and is at least a bit confusing ... However, the documented process (without trying to go through it myself) makes sense to me.
| ::: code-group | ||
| ```sh [Java] | ||
| cd ./xtravels_java | ||
| cd ./xtravels-java | ||
| cds up | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ```sh [Node.js] | ||
| cd ./xtravels | ||
| cds up | ||
| ``` | ||
| ::: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the result of this? If we state this, I think it's clearer what we talk about in the rest of the document:
xtravels-srvserverxtravels-iasservice instancextravels-dbservice instance?- more?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@renejeglinsky: i was unsure if we should include cds up here. There exists a detailed deployment guide. Finally i decided to keep cds up, but I would not go deeper into the deployment and the deployed artifacts. Maybe link deployment guide once? - leave it up to you.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO repeating cds up for each step is somewhat redundant ... People should know how to deploy at this point - and if they don't they should go back to learn about it specifically - not be able to copy&paste from here and "stay ignorant" 🙈
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The guide as it is written has deployment as an integral part. So I think it would feel unfinished if we don't add those small boxes there. While I agree that those boxes occur very often in that guide, I think we'd put a burden on the consumer, that very much influences the experience in a negative way, if we just say: Deploy now and see the result. If you know how to do it, you'll skip the boxes and I don't think it's annoying. If you don't know it by heart and we make you switch guides, that's a bad experience.
Would it only be optional to deploy, that's a different story.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@renejeglinsky: The docs are now fine for me. Feel free to merge it.
…y, and improve authorization instructions
…service types, and enhance deployment instructions
PDT42
left a comment
PDT42
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO - when both of you are happy with the result: 🚀?
3 participants
No description provided.