Make IEmailSender more customizable #50301
Conversation
|
I don't know if this is an issue or not but just want to mention that no matter what lifetime the |
That is a good point. That's the way I made Do you think it's common to need or want services from the request scope? I guess it probably wouldn't hurt. It's just another parameter to pass around. |
I don't have any scenario in mind. |
|
Looks like this PR hasn't been active for some time and the codebase could have been changed in the meantime. |
ghost
added
the
pending-ci-rerun
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @halter73!
Has this change been reviewed by the API Review crew?
Just noticed that the linked issue has api-approved label.
halter73
force-pushed
the
halter73/50298
branch
from
6536db1 to
118a717
Compare
halter73
removed
the
pending-ci-rerun
ghost
added
the
area-infrastructure
* Revert "Remove hardcoded System.Security.Cryptography.Xml version (#48029)" (#50723) This reverts commit 42d14c4. * [Blazor] Prerendered state (#50742) [Blazor] Adds support for persting prerendered state on Blazor Web applications. * Persists state both for server and webassembly as necessary. * Initializes the state when a given interactive runtime is initialized and renders the first set of components. * On WebAssembly, this is the first time the app starts. * On Server this happens every time a circuit starts. * The state is available during the first render, until the components reach quiescence. The approach we follow is different for server and webassembly: * On Server, we support initializing the circuit with an empty set of descriptors and in that case, we delay initialization until the first `UpdateRootComponents` call is issued. * This is because it's hard to deal with the security constraints imposed by starting a new circuit multiple times, and its easier to handle them within UpdateRootComponents. We might switch this approach in the future to go through `StartCircuit` too. * On WebAssembly, we query for the initial set of webassembly components when we are starting the runtime in a Blazor Web Scenario. * We do this because Blazor WebAssembly offers a programatic API to render root components at a given location defined by their selectors, so we need to make sure that those components can receive state at the same time the initial set of WebAssembly components added to the page. There are a set of tests validating different behaviors with regards to enhanced navigation and streaming rendering, as well as making sure that auto mode can access the state on Server and WebAssembly, and that Server gets new state every time a circuit is opened. * Make IEmailSender more customizable (#50301) * Make IEmailSender more customizable * Remove unnecessary metadata * Add TUser parameter * React to API review feedback * Fix IdentitySample.DefaultUI * Update branding to RTM (#50799) --------- Co-authored-by: Igor Velikorossov <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Javier Calvarro Nelson <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Stephen Halter <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: William Godbe <[email protected]>
Well, I tried it with FluentEmail and there were scoping issues. |
|
Hi @augustevn. It looks like you just commented on a closed PR. The team will most probably miss it. If you'd like to bring something important up to their attention, consider filing a new issue and add enough details to build context. |
|
What is this method for? Are there docs to clarify? The code comments don't clarify much. I did create an API proposal: #50904 |
|
Hi @augustevn. It looks like you just commented on a closed PR. The team will most probably miss it. If you'd like to bring something important up to their attention, consider filing a new issue and add enough details to build context. |
Unlike with Identity UI, it's not simple to just replace the razor pages and rewrite the
subjectandhtmlMessageto be whatever you want when usingMapIdentityAPI. This adds DIMs that allow you to customize the emails more easily and continue to useMapIdentityAPI. It also happens to work for Identity UI if you do not want to customize the cshtml.This is intended for RC2. It is pending API review. The API proposal that this PR fixes includes more details.
Fixes #50298