-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.4k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Update the sort logic in the assets grouping #15815
Conversation
WalkthroughThe recent updates across various scripts and stylesheets primarily focus on code optimization, refactoring, and minor functionality adjustments. Changes include the introduction of new functions for improved class inheritance, the removal of redundant lines and comments, and enhancements in user interaction elements like hover behaviors. These modifications aim to enhance maintainability, readability, and performance of the codebase. Changes
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
@Piedone why would the validation the building fails? I rebuild the assets. |
What's exactly the goal here? Check out the workflow output with the diff, and/or download the files the workflow built under https://github.com/OrchardCMS/OrchardCore/actions/runs/8808647832?pr=15815 and compare them locally. |
@Piedone the goal is as follow
so if we have
we should append the files in this order
|
yes but it should not fail here since I rebuild the assets. |
Do we have a use case for this among our assets? What I'd do is download the files and check out the diffs locally. That'll hint at what may go differently. |
Seems a lot of us will wait if there's a rate limiting :) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 0
Out of diff range and nitpick comments (1)
src/OrchardCore.Modules/OrchardCore.Resources/wwwroot/Scripts/codemirror/codemirror.js (1)
Line range hint
1-6
: Consider logging exceptions in the empty catch block to avoid suppressing potential errors.- } catch (e) {} + } catch (e) { + console.error("Error encountered:", e); + }
This pull request has merge conflicts. Please resolve those before requesting a review. |
@Piedone I still don't understand why the WF is failing. The order of the concatenated files could have been changed. but the fact that I build the assets should be enough for the WF to work. Are you able to look into it little more please? I think the order of files in this PR is correct and should work. |
Did you download the workflow artifact and check for the changes locally, compared to your files? |
@Piedone you should be able to see what changed using the diff view here. Looks like spacing changed and order of there the code is added. But, since I recreated all of the resources, it should not detect anything that isn't generated. This looks strange, it is changing the order of the concatenated files, but it seems that the method definition is changing. I am working if |
Running Downloading the artifact from https://github.com/OrchardCMS/OrchardCore/actions/runs/8930280187?pr=15815 yields slightly different changes. So, it seems that the Gulpfile changes cause the merged files to be flaky/dependent on the platform. I don't know why. However, I don't think it's worth putting any more time in this. I've spent about a workday sorting this out previously, with the goal of getting it to a stable state, so we can keep updating assets and get a reliable feedback if we've forgotten that. The changes in this PR address a use case that we don't actually have. It'd be nice to have (but still only "nice to have" and low on the list of priorities in my book due to the lack of use cases) if we were to want to maintain this assets pipeline for the foreseeable future, but we want to get rid of it. |
@Piedone We actually use it and should fix it. Here is one example |
I see. I searched and that's the only file where globbing and static paths are mixed. Only globbing is supported, even if multiple wildcard paths are listed (what also happens a few times). So, I suggest expanding that config manually by listing all the files, or converting it to an all-wildcard one. And if you want to really diligent, then also add a validation here that will fail the pipeline if the two are mixed. |
Here is the output of that media. The results are what I am expecting. The logic in main is wrong and the use of
|
@Piedone your soon to be favor PR is passing. I am wondering if there was something wrong with my environment. But what I did was to run I am just happy that it finally worked and the files sorting is correct. |
@Piedone you good with this? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Piedone yes it works for me. Here is what I get as I am saving random file that are being watched |
That seems like an in-progress build still. Does the output file change in the end? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
OK then!
No description provided.