docs(auth): add email link authentication guide - #9170
Conversation
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9170 +/- ##
============================================
+ Coverage 68.10% 68.40% +0.31%
- Complexity 1912 1915 +3
============================================
Files 510 516 +6
Lines 37877 37853 -24
Branches 5193 5183 -10
============================================
+ Hits 25792 25890 +98
+ Misses 10261 10178 -83
+ Partials 1824 1785 -39
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
Thank you for this - it's a substantial, carefully researched guide on a genuinely hard flow, and filling this gap in the RNFB docs is really appreciated. Requesting a structural pass so the page matches the style of the upstream Firebase email-link docs: official default / non-branded path first (the way people will first integrate), then optional custom-domain / branded hosting. Community tools can be mentioned where they help, but please don't promote specific projects - same approach as our other auth pages (phone, social), which link official Firebase docs and leave third-party helpers as optional asides. Inline comments have suggested copy where that might reduce back-and-forth. None of this is a knock on the work you've already done; it's aligning the page with how we document the rest of Auth and I think this will help a lot of people in one of the more difficult areas of cross-platform mobile dev |
…entation clarity for email link authentication
|
@mikehardy made some changes in the docs pls have a look if need any further changes do let me know |
|
Hey @rutvik24 👋 Thanks for the update — this is much closer to how we document the rest of Auth. Default Hosting path first, migration off Dynamic Links, Expo, troubleshooting, the two-domain split: all the structural bits from the review landed. One small tweak before merge: the intro to Optional community helpers. I want to acknowledge why people reach for community tools (branding in the email link, branded continue pages, custom domains) and that the work behind them may genuinely help — while making it crystal clear we don't control or endorse third-party repos and can't vouch for them. Suggested replacement for that section intro:
And for the association-files forward reference (line ~88):
Happy to approve once that's in. Cheers |
Frame optional third-party tools as helpers with an explicit RNFB non-endorsement / security disclaimer, per review on invertase#9170. Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
|
@mikehardy updated the Optional community helpers intro with your suggested disclaimer (no maintain/control/endorse; cannot vouch for security or availability), and the association-files forward reference now says those generators are optional and unofficial. Also reframed the two helpers:
Happy to tweak further if anything still feels off. |
Summary
Test plan
yarn lint:markdownyarn lint:spellcheck