github-starred/better-auth
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth.git synced 2026-05-23 15:42:09 -05:00
Code Issues 2.5k Packages Projects Releases 112 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #7291] [Feature] Allow users to dismiss expired invitations #19412

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-15 18:28:33 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 2 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-15 18:28:33 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @caiotarifa on GitHub (Jan 12, 2026).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/7291

Is this suited for github?

  • Yes, this is suited for github

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

When a user receives an organization invitation that expires, they cannot remove it from their invitation list. The invitation becomes "stuck" in the UI with no available actions.

Currently:

  • acceptInvitation - fails if invitation is expired
  • rejectInvitation - fails if invitation is expired
  • cancelInvitation - only works for organization members who sent the invitation

Describe the solution you'd like

What about adding a method that allows invitation recipients to dismiss expired invitations from their list?

await client.organization.dismissInvitation({ invitationId })

This would:

  • Only work for expired invitations;
  • Remove the invitation from the user's listUserInvitations() results;
  • Give users control over their invitation inbox.

Describe alternatives you've considered

Or, just allow rejectInvitation to work on expired invitations, so users can explicitly reject them even after expiration.

Additional context

Why not stop displaying expired invitations?
Well, because I consider it a usability problem for the invitation to simply "disappear".

Originally created by @caiotarifa on GitHub (Jan 12, 2026). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/7291 ### Is this suited for github? - [x] Yes, this is suited for github ### Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. When a user receives an organization invitation that expires, they cannot remove it from their invitation list. The invitation becomes "stuck" in the UI with no available actions. Currently: - `acceptInvitation` - fails if invitation is expired - `rejectInvitation` - fails if invitation is expired - `cancelInvitation` - only works for organization members who sent the invitation ### Describe the solution you'd like What about adding a method that allows invitation recipients to dismiss expired invitations from their list? ```javascript await client.organization.dismissInvitation({ invitationId }) ``` This would: - Only work for expired invitations; - Remove the invitation from the user's `listUserInvitations()` results; - Give users control over their invitation inbox. ### Describe alternatives you've considered Or, just allow `rejectInvitation` to work on expired invitations, so users can explicitly reject them even after expiration. ### Additional context **Why not stop displaying expired invitations?** Well, because I consider it a usability problem for the invitation to simply "disappear".
GiteaMirror added the lockedenhancement labels 2026-04-15 18:28:33 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-15 18:28:36 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ChetanReddyC commented on GitHub (Jan 12, 2026):

hey @caiotarifa if this feature is valid im taking this!

<!-- gh-comment-id:3738726575 --> @ChetanReddyC commented on GitHub (Jan 12, 2026): hey @caiotarifa if this feature is valid im taking this!
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-15 18:28:37 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@ChetanReddyC commented on GitHub (Jan 13, 2026):

Thanks for the update and for the alternative fix @Bekacru

My earlier PR proposed a dedicated dismissInvitation endpoint to keep the semantics explicit (expired + recipient-only) and avoid overloading existing actions, but I completely understand the preference for a minimal API surface and reusing rejectInvitation instead.

The current approach makes sense from a maintenance and backwards-compatibility standpoint. Happy to close my PR in favor of this solution, and thanks for reviewing the issue so quickly!

<!-- gh-comment-id:3742088829 --> @ChetanReddyC commented on GitHub (Jan 13, 2026): Thanks for the update and for the alternative fix @Bekacru My earlier PR proposed a dedicated dismissInvitation endpoint to keep the semantics explicit (expired + recipient-only) and avoid overloading existing actions, but I completely understand the preference for a minimal API surface and reusing rejectInvitation instead. The current approach makes sense from a maintenance and backwards-compatibility standpoint. Happy to close my PR in favor of this solution, and thanks for reviewing the issue so quickly!
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
adapter
astro
awaiting external contributor
blocked
breaking
breaking change
bug
c-devops
core
credentials
database
dependencies
devops
devtools
docs
documentation
duplicate
elysia
enhancement
enterprise
expo
express
fastify
good first issue
help wanted
hono
identity
infra
integration
invalid
javascript
locked
maintenance
need-more-information
needs: info
needs: repro
nextjs
nuxt
oauth
organization
P0
payments
perf
platform
plugin
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 question
ready
regression
remix
security
social-provider
solid
stale
svelte
tanstack-start
tracking
version-bump
vue
wontfix
No Label enhancement locked
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/better-auth#19412
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?