Adding support to validate an architecture without relying on a pattern #793
Conversation
lbulanti-ms
requested review from
aidanm3341,
willosborne,
grahampacker-ms,
jpgough-ms,
rocketstack-matt and
Thels
as code owners
| } | ||
| } catch (error) { | ||
| logger.error('An error occured:', error); | ||
| process.exit(1); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if at some point it would make sense to not exit the process here, but instead in the CLI component instead which calls this code. I'm thinking from a reuse perspective, there could potentially be an app which doesn't want to exit when an error occurs, but instead just displays it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes I agree, this is something that we will probably need to do!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes. This is going to be important for the CLI server, I would imagine. We want to just return the validation output back to the calling module
| * @param failOnWarnings Whether or not to treat a warning as a failure in the validation process. | ||
| * @param jsonSchemaLocation the location of the patterns JSON Schema to validate. | ||
| * @param metaSchemaPath the path of the meta schemas to use for ajv. | ||
| * @param debug the flag to enable debug logging. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
small thing - might be good to have a dash after the param name, I was ever so briefly confused because I thought this was telling me to 'debug the flag' 😆
…ove readibility of docs
In this PR I added the support to validate an architecture without the need of a pattern. The architecture validation for now is based on the spectral rules that already exist in the project.