code review 134830043: oauth: fix Token.Expired

oauth: fix Token.Expired

I was dumb before. As penance, I now include tests.

Verified also that this fixes an issue I was having with
Camlistore.

[bradfitz, 2014-08-26 01:57:42]

Hello adg@golang.org, jbd@google.com (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com),

I'd like you to review this change to
https://code.google.com/p/goauth2

[bradfitz, 2014-08-26 02:07:09]

Hello adg@golang.org, jbd@google.com (cc: golang-codereviews@googlegroups.com),

Please take another look.

[adg, 2014-08-26 02:32:43]

LGTM

[jbd, 2014-08-26 02:52:09]

LGTM

You should use the new package :)

[bradfitz, 2014-08-26 03:31:55]

*** Submitted as https://code.google.com/p/goauth2/source/detail?r=f967a480d1c0
***

oauth: fix Token.Expired

I was dumb before. As penance, I now include tests.

Verified also that this fixes an issue I was having with
Camlistore.

LGTM=adg, jbd
R=adg, jbd
CC=golang-codereviews
https://codereview.appspot.com/134830043

[bradfitz, 2014-08-26 03:33:17]

When I heard about the new package, I filed a Camlistore bug to switch to
it.

But then I looked at it and immediately found a lot of things that weirded
me out and decided not to move ahead with the switch yet.

But you've been busy closing those bugs, so I should give it a second look,
I agree.



On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:52 PM, <jbd@google.com> wrote:

> LGTM
>
> You should use the new package :)
>
> https://codereview.appspot.com/134830043/
>

[jbd, 2014-08-26 03:58:48]

> But then I looked at it and immediately found a lot of things that weirded me
out and decided not to move ahead with the switch yet.

There are fundamental problems with the new package (since it's just a
code reorg of goauth2), but there are more fundamental problems with
goauth2.

If you're wasting time on OAuth 2.0, please do it on the new package.


On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 8:33 PM, Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org> wrote:
> When I heard about the new package, I filed a Camlistore bug to switch to
> it.
>
> But then I looked at it and immediately found a lot of things that weirded
> me out and decided not to move ahead with the switch yet.
>
> But you've been busy closing those bugs, so I should give it a second look,
> I agree.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 7:52 PM, <jbd@google.com> wrote:
>>
>> LGTM
>>
>> You should use the new package :)
>>
>> https://codereview.appspot.com/134830043/
>
>



-- 
Burcu Dogan