Skip to content

Conversation

@Christinarlong
Copy link
Contributor

@Christinarlong Christinarlong commented Nov 3, 2025

DESCRIBE YOUR PR

Adds docs to the integration platform telling integrators how to use the new manual refresh method to refresh their installers tokens.

IS YOUR CHANGE URGENT?

Help us prioritize incoming PRs by letting us know when the change needs to go live.

  • Urgent deadline (GA date, etc.):
  • [X ] Other deadline: I want to GA this feature sometime this week.
  • None: Not urgent, can wait up to 1 week+

SLA

  • Teamwork makes the dream work, so please add a reviewer to your PRs.
  • Please give the docs team up to 1 week to review your PR unless you've added an urgent due date to it.
    Thanks in advance for your help!

PRE-MERGE CHECKLIST

Make sure you've checked the following before merging your changes:

  • Checked Vercel preview for correctness, including links
  • PR was reviewed and approved by any necessary SMEs (subject matter experts)
  • PR was reviewed and approved by a member of the Sentry docs team

Images

image

@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Nov 3, 2025

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
sentry-docs Ready Ready Preview Comment Nov 10, 2025 11:34pm
1 Skipped Deployment
Project Deployment Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
develop-docs Ignored Ignored Preview Nov 10, 2025 11:34pm

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 3, 2025

Bundle Report

Changes will increase total bundle size by 699 bytes (0.0%) ⬆️. This is within the configured threshold ✅

Detailed changes
Bundle name Size Change
sentry-docs-client-array-push 10.16MB -6 bytes (-0.0%) ⬇️
sentry-docs-server-cjs 12.9MB 705 bytes (0.01%) ⬆️

Affected Assets, Files, and Routes:

view changes for bundle: sentry-docs-server-cjs

Assets Changed:

Asset Name Size Change Total Size Change (%)
1729.js -3 bytes 1.74MB -0.0%
../instrumentation.js -3 bytes 1.07MB -0.0%
9523.js -3 bytes 1.04MB -0.0%
../app/[[...path]]/page.js.nft.json 238 bytes 866.2kB 0.03%
../app/platform-redirect/page.js.nft.json 238 bytes 866.12kB 0.03%
../app/sitemap.xml/route.js.nft.json 238 bytes 863.35kB 0.03%
view changes for bundle: sentry-docs-client-array-push

Assets Changed:

Asset Name Size Change Total Size Change (%)
static/chunks/pages/_app-*.js -3 bytes 882.71kB -0.0%
static/chunks/8321-*.js -3 bytes 425.87kB -0.0%
static/7BT4XTRUk6qfYXkuCA5er/_buildManifest.js (New) 684 bytes 684 bytes 100.0% 🚀
static/7BT4XTRUk6qfYXkuCA5er/_ssgManifest.js (New) 77 bytes 77 bytes 100.0% 🚀
static/16FPsz7i5-*.js (Deleted) -684 bytes 0 bytes -100.0% 🗑️
static/16FPsz7i5-*.js (Deleted) -77 bytes 0 bytes -100.0% 🗑️

### Refreshing Tokens Manually for Integrators
Sometimes incidents or other technical anomalies can lead to token refreshing being committed on the Sentry side but then the token is lost in transmission on the way back. As a result, we've added a method for integrators to explicitly refresh and request a new token for their installers.

This manual refresh method uses a different authorization scheme where you will need to send a JWT signed with your client secret to the previous
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is there a reason for someone not to use this every time to get a refresh token? I mean should we recommend that instead of asking them to refresh after fail?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah I thought about this for a bit and I'm not sure tbh, I assume refresh tokens are preffered but yeah this feature does basically the same thing. I'll ask security.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Michelle and I poked into this a bit and it looks like for the Oauth 2.1 spec it's required to have the refresh_token and authorizations grant so we should keep those and have those as preferred. It seems like it would be preferable to move toward the client secret JWT method for authentication as a future TODO. I will mark the refresh_token grant_type/method as preferred.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants