Skip to content
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

feat: add new top-level schedule property #819

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Nov 18, 2021
Merged

Conversation

eduardoboucas
Copy link
Member

- Summary

Currently, any schedule data is surfaced in the result of zipFunction and zipFunctions as config.schedule. This PR adds a new top-level schedule property, which contains the same value.

This property will be useful when we introduce the in-code config declarations, because we'll be able to merge schedule data coming from the two types of sources and decide which one takes priority.

- Test plan

New test added.

@eduardoboucas eduardoboucas added the type: feature code contributing to the implementation of a feature and/or user facing functionality label Nov 17, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@netlify-team-account-1 netlify-team-account-1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Loving these super small PRs, really easy to review ^^

We already have a test for schedule: https://github.com/netlify/zip-it-and-ship-it/blob/main/tests/main.js#L2241
What does the new test give us? (not blocking obvsly, the more tests the merrier)

@eduardoboucas
Copy link
Member Author

Loving these super small PRs, really easy to review ^^

We already have a test for schedule: https://github.com/netlify/zip-it-and-ship-it/blob/main/tests/main.js#L2241 What does the new test give us? (not blocking obvsly, the more tests the merrier)

The other test was primarily built to assert the creation of a manifest file. I wanted to have a test specific for schedules, which will be useful once we add the in-code annotations. We can either remove the schedule assertions from the test you linked, or we can keep them because it's fine to have that assertion duplicated. What would you prefer?

@kodiakhq
Copy link
Contributor

kodiakhq bot commented Nov 18, 2021

This PR currently has a merge conflict. Please resolve this and then re-add the automerge label.

@eduardoboucas
Copy link
Member Author

@netlify-team-account-1 the review got stale when I fixed the merge conflict - could you ✅ again, please?

@minivan minivan self-requested a review November 18, 2021 11:58
Copy link

@minivan minivan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@eduardoboucas eduardoboucas merged commit 1da8089 into main Nov 18, 2021
@eduardoboucas eduardoboucas deleted the feat/schedule-property branch November 18, 2021 12:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: feature code contributing to the implementation of a feature and/or user facing functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants