Feature: allow create / update users on the API users table with autenticated token

[frital]

This PR aims to, as an option, allow the API to create / update the authenticated user in the local users table.
To achieve this, its possible to inform a custom method on a custom UserProvider, that will be called instead retrieveByCredentials and will receive the complete decoded token as parameter, not just the credentials.

[frital]

Hi @robsontenorio ! Any special reason to not accept this PR? It is out of scope or something missing? Pls let me know! Thx in advance!

[frital]

Alo @robsontenorio ! Tudo bem? Alguma razao específica pra nao querer aceitar o PR? Ou só correria mesmo? :)
Muito obrigado por antecipacao, e no seu aguardo!!
Abracos!!

[robsontenorio]

@frital hi there. Could you please include tests?

I am not sure about the flow. With tests we could review it.

[OfficialBAMM]

I'd like to have this merged as well.

Can I create the tests for you so you can merge the request?

[frital]

Hi @OfficialBAMM !

This would be nice!! Thx in advance!

[robsontenorio]

@OfficialBAMM for sure! We need tests to keep consistence through all features :)

[OfficialBAMM]

Created the PR. Let me know what you think!

[robsontenorio]

@OfficialBAMM I think you forgot to open PR

[OfficialBAMM]

@robsontenorio I opened an PR to this PR.

See: frital#1

Atleast I think that how this should be done, but I might be wrong.

[frital]

Thx @OfficialBAMM !! I just merged you PR!!

I hope that now @robsontenorio will be able to accept the PR. =)
Thx guys!!

[leidison]

@frital,

I was already about to implement an egalitarian solution.

Congratulations for the initiative. I need this feature.

[robsontenorio]

Could you guys test master branch with this feature DISABLED if everything is ok, before I release a tag ?

[OfficialBAMM]

Just tested it on my application with an empty string or removed at all. Both worked for me.

Given a random string gives a Call to undefined method App\\Providers\\KeycloakEloquentUserProvider::randomFunction().
This should probably give a better error. If you're interested I could make a PR for it.

Looking at the code, I see no reason why it shouldn't work for existing installations.