Conversation
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| // Helper function to execute shell commands and log output | ||
| function execCommand(command, options = {}) { | ||
| try { | ||
| execSync(command, { stdio: 'inherit', ...options }); |
Check warning
Code scanning / CodeQL
Shell command built from environment values
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2450 +/- ##
========================================
Coverage 95.66% 95.66%
========================================
Files 725 725
Lines 19380 19380
Branches 6169 6505 +336
========================================
Hits 18540 18540
Misses 832 832
Partials 8 8 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
| PropertyFilterProperty, | ||
| PropertyFilterToken, | ||
| } from '@cloudscape-design/collection-hooks'; | ||
| import { PropertyFilterTokenGroup } from '@cloudscape-design/collection-hooks/cjs/interfaces'; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These are temporary changes just to prove that the PR indeed fetches code from the collection-hooks branch: cloudscape-design/collection-hooks#74
| // Copy built peer dependency to node_modules | ||
| console.log(`Copying built ${targetRepository} to node_modules...`); | ||
| execCommand(`mkdir -p ${nodeModulesPackagePath}`); | ||
| execCommand(`cp -R ${tempDir}/lib/* ${nodeModulesPackagePath}`); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This part is shaky. In collection-hooks we package the distribution to the lib folder entirely. In other packages we might use the root folder or dist. We can either parametrise this line or make all packages better consistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not an issue. We standardised everything to package to lib folder 👍🏻
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Where it might be an issue is some packages produce multiple artifacts in the lib folder. E.g. test-utils, theming-core, components, board-components, code-view
2 participants
Description
Related links, issue #, if available: n/a
How has this been tested?
Review checklist
The following items are to be evaluated by the author(s) and the reviewer(s).
Correctness
CONTRIBUTING.md.CONTRIBUTING.md.Security
checkSafeUrlfunction.Testing
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.