Allow running a build from a repo with only one commit when not in CI #812
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ghengeveld
approved these changes
Sep 6, 2023
tmeasday
force-pushed
the
tom/ap-3635-ignore-single-commit-restriction-in-addon-initiated-builds
branch
from
7d6d948 to
3cbe8fa
Compare
ghengeveld
approved these changes
Sep 6, 2023
tmeasday
deleted the
tom/ap-3635-ignore-single-commit-restriction-in-addon-initiated-builds
branch
ghengeveld
changed the title
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We have this check because in CI it is likely a single commit repo means a misconfigured CI job.
In the addon, this is much less likely, so we may as well allow you to run such builds as part of experimenting with a new storybook. I didn't add it as a CLI flag as it seems like asking for trouble.
I'm not sure if there's a good way to write tests for this. The original PR that added the check didn't have tests for #207 -- do you have any ideas @ghengeveld ?