github-starred/better-auth
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth.git synced 2026-05-23 07:18:56 -05:00
Code Issues 2.5k Packages Projects Releases 112 Wiki Activity

[GH-ISSUE #73] Error handling for betterauth().api.signUpEmail() #25437

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-04-17 15:38:50 -05:00 by GiteaMirror · 4 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-17 15:38:50 -05:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @rdmchr on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024).
Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/73

I want to create a user account on the server side and as far as I can tell the right way to do this is, is the following:

// in a real code base there should be one central better auth instance, but this is just an example
betterAuth({
	database: drizzleAdapter(db, {
		provider: "pg", // or "mysql", "sqlite"
		schema: schema
	}),
	emailAndPassword: { enabled: true },
	logger: {
		verboseLogging: true,
	},
}).api.signUpEmail({body: {name: "XYZ", email: "example@example.com", password: "password"}});

The problem with this is that there is no error handling at all. The types indicate that you either get the user/session or null. Even wrapping this statement with a try/catch did not help as the catch statement never gets triggered.

I listed a few ways of solving this issue and would like to hear from a maintainer how they think this should be solved.

  1. If this is not the intended way to use this library (i.e. all users should be required to register on their own) I could just create a custom fetch call to the API endpoint.
  2. Adding an option to the createAuthClient().signUp.email() to NOT create a new session after creating the account. This would allow me to just call that function on my admin page without having to create my own API endpoint.
  3. Make the signUpEmail function throw or return errors. The errors are already logged when using verboseLogging, so they should already exist somewhere. Maybe exposing them is not too much work.

Quick note: I changed the title since I only tested that one function, but this might impact other functions on the betterauth().api as well.

Originally created by @rdmchr on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024). Original GitHub issue: https://github.com/better-auth/better-auth/issues/73 I want to create a user account on the server side and as far as I can tell the right way to do this is, is the following: ```TS // in a real code base there should be one central better auth instance, but this is just an example betterAuth({ database: drizzleAdapter(db, { provider: "pg", // or "mysql", "sqlite" schema: schema }), emailAndPassword: { enabled: true }, logger: { verboseLogging: true, }, }).api.signUpEmail({body: {name: "XYZ", email: "example@example.com", password: "password"}}); ``` The problem with this is that there is no error handling at all. The types indicate that you either get the user/session or `null`. Even wrapping this statement with a try/catch did not help as the catch statement never gets triggered. I listed a few ways of solving this issue and would like to hear from a maintainer how they think this should be solved. 1. If this is not the intended way to use this library (i.e. all users should be required to register on their own) I could just create a custom `fetch` call to the API endpoint. 2. Adding an option to the `createAuthClient().signUp.email()` to NOT create a new session after creating the account. This would allow me to just call that function on my admin page without having to create my own API endpoint. 3. Make the `signUpEmail` function throw or return errors. The errors are already logged when using `verboseLogging`, so they should already exist somewhere. Maybe exposing them is not too much work. Quick note: I changed the title since I only tested that one function, but this might impact other functions on the `betterauth().api` as well.
GiteaMirror added the locked label 2026-04-17 15:38:50 -05:00
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-17 15:38:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Bekacru commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024):

We definitely need to improve the error handling on the server side. While discussing it, we were torn between returning errors as values or throwing them. Handling errors as values adds unnecessary complexity, so I think we should move everything to throw an "APIError" on the server instead. That being said, the "signUp.email" still creates a session on the server side. We probably should have createUser action that's not exposed to the client.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2390552908 --> @Bekacru commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024): We definitely need to improve the error handling on the server side. While discussing it, we were torn between returning errors as values or throwing them. Handling errors as values adds unnecessary complexity, so I think we should move everything to throw an "APIError" on the server instead. That being said, the "signUp.email" still creates a session on the server side. We probably should have `createUser` action that's not exposed to the client.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-17 15:38:52 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@rdmchr commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024):

Yeah, functions to manage other users as an administrator would be great!

<!-- gh-comment-id:2391315097 --> @rdmchr commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024): Yeah, functions to manage other users as an administrator would be great!
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-17 15:38:54 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@Bekacru commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024):

Yeah, functions to manage other users as an administrator would be great!

there is an admin panel in the works (similar to clerk's user management ui). It'll come with an admin plugin that adds these methods.

<!-- gh-comment-id:2392254820 --> @Bekacru commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024): > Yeah, functions to manage other users as an administrator would be great! there is an admin panel in the works (similar to clerk's user management ui). It'll come with an admin plugin that adds these methods.
GiteaMirror commented 2026-04-17 15:38:55 -05:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@rdmchr commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024):

That sounds lovely. I don't need a full UI, but just having access to those methods will be wonderful. Great project so far ♥

<!-- gh-comment-id:2392355090 --> @rdmchr commented on GitHub (Oct 3, 2024): That sounds lovely. I don't need a full UI, but just having access to those methods will be wonderful. Great project so far ♥
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 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#25437
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?