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

Fix authoring and field #4697

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 17, 2024
Merged

Conversation

thecalcc
Copy link
Contributor

@thecalcc thecalcc commented Dec 9, 2024

STT-109

@thecalcc thecalcc requested a review from tomaskikutis December 9, 2024 13:14
@@ -23,8 +23,10 @@ export const setupAuthoringReact = (url: string) => {
(extensionUrl) => extensionUrl.startsWith(trimStartExact(parsedPath.hash, '#')),
) != null;

const isNavToPlan = parsedPath.hash.startsWith('#/planning');
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

isNavigatingToPlanning would fit on the line too, wouldn't it? :)

@thecalcc thecalcc merged commit 66562d0 into superdesk:develop Dec 17, 2024
3 checks passed
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@
"sass-loader": "6.0.6",
"shortid": "2.2.8",
"style-loader": "0.20.2",
"superdesk-ui-framework": "4.0.3",
"superdesk-ui-framework": "^4.0.4",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

imo would be better to avoid ^ there, we had changes in hotfix version which broke builds, the idea to remove that was that we get the updated framework version tested before it's used by clients
cc @tomaskikutis

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You might have replied about it before, but I forgot - why package-lock isn't enough for hotfixes?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it will start breaking builds in superdesk repo but not in superdesk-client-core when there is a change that requires changes in core

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why would it break builds in main superdesk repo? It also has package-lock

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

or you say that when client-core is being updated from root repo it would update the version then?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

dependabot will update ui framework and the build will fail, but it won't be visible on client-core repo but rather on some superdesk-cp where we would be using an older version, but which none of the ui team is following

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've added a grep-lint rule for this #4710

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants