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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
implement "plugin" package type #149370
implement "plugin" package type #149370
Changes from 5 commits
04d5557
f421c94
fdec39c
eea7254
fc2b0c4
352c68a
c5f27b6
39198ff
6e7fcff
16d5438
b4349da
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
NIT:
rand
in tests is bad, m'kay?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lol, fine, want me to just hard-code a version here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, given we had surprises in the past when using the current version, having an hardcoded one seems the best compromise to me
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What are
serviceFolders
exactly? I saw the documentation on this property later in the PR, but still not sure to get it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Pretty sure they were added to the documentation system for core specifically so that
core/server
andcore/public
were separate documentation sections. I'm not totally clear what it actually does, but I'm just maintaining support for it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a fundamental change. The associated test file will have to be adapted accordingly.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See
6e7fcff
(#149370)There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's still unclear to me how to define multi-zone (browser+server) plugins with this package approach? Is it as simple as creating a package with a
server
andclient
sub folders? I assume so, given the PR remove the distinction with a singleplugin
package type, but I wanted to confirm it.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's based on the
plugin.server
andplugin.browser
properties inkibana.jsonc
. They're both required properties in the manifest.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry if my question was unclear, let me rephrase: can we still define plugins having both
server
andclient
parts with the new system?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I feel like we should be checking for duplicated from the two sources somehow here, unless we're adamant there's no risk of plugins being scanned by both (fs+package), wdyt?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The filesystem scanning only finds legacy plugins with
kibana.json
files, and the package scanning only finds packages withkibana.jsonc
files.fsDiscovery$
won't ever produce duplicate values, though I'm find adding a distinct operator here.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
My naive question was: what about a folder with both
kibana.json
andkibana.jsonc
for the same plugin?