feat: Limited login and Profile for IOS with type def

[cocoa-rum]

PR for https://github.com/thebergamo/react-native-fbsdk-next/issues/7

Thanks @leolusoli for Profile part

PR contains Authentication Token along side with limited log in: If we use limited login, we lose access to access token, so we need an alternative and Authentication Token is. So from my view point Authentication Token complements limited log in

Also Profile part Related to the commnent

[cocoa-rum]

@bernard-kms I agree. I will improve what you said Speaking about "platform-specific behavior". Log in button contains nonce and loginTracking, which are specifice for IOS too, should I rename them nonceIOS and loginTrackingIOS as well ?

[kmsbernard]

Speaking about "platform-specific behavior". Log in button contains nonce and loginTracking, which are specifice for IOS too, should I rename them nonceIOS and loginTrackingIOS as well ?

I think that would be safer(maybe the safest) way to implement it. When limited login available in android (FB would implement it, wouldn't they?) we can add a new cross-platform one while gradually deprecating the platform-specific one and not making any breaking changes.

[cocoa-rum]

@bernard-kms @leolusoli I think we are ready for review

Also, what the best practice with package. I think, I am doing it a little bit complex way. It's my first time working with external package in such way I added forked repo ( yarn add "local repo path") Into my project. Do edits and paste changes into the package - commit

[cocoa-rum]

@thebergamo I got it. I will fix things that @glenna mentioned for the limited log in part

Also, just a small comment that on reviewing I did not understand why Profile and Authentication Token was added as part of the Limited Login functionality

As for Authentication Token - if we use limited login, we lose access to access token, so we need alternative and Authentication Token is. So from my view point Authentication Token complements limited log in

As for Profile, this commnent And it appeared in this PR. May be we should ask @leolusoli to create separate PR with Profile part? and from this PR we will remove it

[glenna]

@cocoa-rum thank you! yeah, I got the context when I read the issue, but as a reviewer I don't expect to need to read all comments on an issue thread to get the context ;). Just a future reference to add more information to the PR description.

Regarding moving Profile impl to a separate PR, I would leave that up to @thebergamo. (If it were me, I would leave it in, as now it's reviewed and ready to roll -- but update the description so that in the release notes for the version when the PR is linked there's easy to access information)

[thebergamo]

Regarding Profile impl, I believe it's pretty ok having it here, so no biggie from my side. You could just give more context as mentioned by @glenna in the PR description, so it would be much easier to track in the changelog later on :)

[leolusoli]

@glenna @thebergamo I'll explain you tomorrow with some examples of what happening for Profile imageURL field, because there's some particular situation regarding limited/not limited login (i.e. different value returned). I'll also fix the typos in comments and style some code according to the guidelines described in the comments. I think tomorrow will be all pushed and explained :)

Thanks for your time again.

[cocoa-rum]

@thebergamo looks like we fixed all remarks for now You are welcome to review or make some comments for improving PR

[glenna]

@thebergamo did you also want the readme section before merging? If so, I think that's the last thing we are waiting on.

[thebergamo]

Yes, because without that could lead others to some mistakes

[glenna]

@thebergamo agreed! Just wanted to make it clear :)

[cocoa-rum]

Yes, because without that could lead others to some mistakes

Should I and @leolusoli add changes to readme? Or what is next step?

[thebergamo]

Yes, you should.

[kmsbernard]

LGTM, and yes, a proper documentation is important to complete this work to be released.

[cocoa-rum]

Readme is ready. Is it correct?

[github-actions[bot]]

:tada: This PR is included in version 4.2.0 :tada:

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot :package::rocket:

[thebergamo]

Version released :) v4.2.0

Thank y'all for the effort for make it happen :)