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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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
feat: Add spotlightBrowser integration #13263
feat: Add spotlightBrowser integration #13263
Changes from all commits
1b83a36
81c7ba2
0deb983
2954e41
fdf4eac
f88efc5
5965324
2097073
f31f7d8
074dccd
cf26dad
50fcda5
ff233c7
f89533f
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.
I think this is fine given spotlight is pretty much a one-off at the moment. Another option would be to adjust our integrations API to acomodate for such scenarios, say in an
afterSdkInit
hook that's aways invoked, regardless if the SDK is enabled or not. Will bring this up with the team but let's not block the PR on this as it's easily changeable.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.
Agreed. I thought about adding a special property like
forced
or something like that on the integration but I'll leave that debate to you folksThere 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.
We can also do
But I think the current version expresses the intent a bit more clearly: if there are no integrations matching this name, add 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.
I'm fine with any of these, as long as we only add the integration if it isn't yet present 👍
Thanks for fixing!
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 was a bit scared when I saw this but as far as I can tell we don't extend the
init
fromBaseClient
in the derived client classes. Given we guard the base clientinit
implementation this should be fine.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.
Event if we extend, aren't we supposed to call
super()
? I think that's the responsibility of downstream class implementors and not something we should be worried about here?