feat[jwt-verifier]: Add type definitions for jwt-verifier

[ryansonshine]

Updates jwt-verifier with type definitions

Resolves: #393

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

• [x] The commit message follows our guidelines
• [x] Tests for the changes have been added (for bug fixes / features)
• [x] Docs have been added / updated (for bug fixes / features)

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

• [ ] Bugfix
• [x] Feature
• [ ] Code style update (formatting, local variables)
• [ ] Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
• [ ] Adding Tests
• [ ] Build related changes
• [ ] CI related changes
• [ ] Documentation changes
• [ ] Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

Issue Number: 393

What is the new behavior?

Type definitions for jwt-verifier

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

• [ ] Yes
• [x] No

Other information

Reviewers

[swiftone]

@ryansonshine - Thanks for the PR (tests included, nice!)

We'll give this a look over and see about moving it forward.

[swiftone]

Internal ref: OKTA-279270

[brandonchinn178]

I don't believe this works without esModuleInterop. Using this type definition, I get

[server] const oktaJwtVerifier = new OktaJwtVerifier({
[server]                         ^
[server] TypeError: jwt_verifier_1.default is not a constructor

It works if I change to export = OktaJwtVerifier.

[ryansonshine]

I don't believe this works without esModuleInterop. Using this type definition, I get

[server] const oktaJwtVerifier = new OktaJwtVerifier({
[server]                         ^
[server] TypeError: jwt_verifier_1.default is not a constructor

It works if I change to export = OktaJwtVerifier.

@brandonchinn178 You're right, good catch! export updated

[shellscape]

@ryansonshine any chance you'd be willing to put these up on https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped while this is under review?

[ryansonshine]

@shellscape If we believe it may be some time before this makes it into a release of okta-oidc-js, I'd be happy to

@swiftone Do we have a rough estimate on when this could make its way into a release?

[shellscape]

@ryansonshine it's not a knock on Okta by any means, but they don't tend to move too quickly. They have an internal process that creates some friction, as compared to other open source projects.

[ryansonshine]

@ryansonshine it's not a knock on Okta by any means, but they don't tend to move too quickly. They have an internal process that creates some friction, as compared to other open source projects.

Fair enough; I'll work on getting this added to DefinitelyTyped

[ryansonshine]

@shellscape @brandonchinn178 If you could please review https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped/pull/51418

[shellscape]

Thank you!

[denysoblohin-okta]

Closing in favour of https://github.com/okta/okta-oidc-js/pull/979 (copy)