Ignore `.eslintrc.json` at project init #548

nvuillam · 2023-03-30T23:29:46Z

When we do an init of CI project with sfdx-hardis, the first package.xml is computed using the great sfdx-git-delta :)

But it always adds .eslintrc.json in Aura and LWC types... so we have to update it manually

Would it be possible to always ignore them, as they won't never have any use being deployed to an org ? :)

scolladon · 2023-03-31T07:48:03Z

Thanks for raising this issue and thanks for contributing in making this project better!

I think you could use the --ignore parameter of the plugin, it looks like to be exactly what you need.
You could feed this parameter with the .forceignore or the .gitignore if their content exclude those files

Let us know if it is suited for your use case, if not let's talk about a new feature!

nvuillam · 2023-03-31T08:02:00Z

Thanks for the reply :)

But I really think it should be ignored by default because such behaviour is corresponding to 150% of sfdx-git-delta use cases, and these files must be committed anyway (and they are already in .forceignore by default)

scolladon · 2023-03-31T09:32:39Z

Hi @nvuillam, thanks for taking some times discussing this together in dm, really appreciated
From a pure product standpoint we aim to provide a flexible and simple plugin, we do not know better than our customers and do not pretend we could foresee every use cases 😅.
This is why we provide optional parameters to help customer drive the plugin to achieve their particular goals.

Framing the requirement

In this situation the need as I understand it is to not add in the package.xml the elements that are not metadata (indeed makes sense...).
Question can be asked as well for the output folder containing incremental changes. Maybe there are uses cases where we want them to be copied anyway (splitting/revamping project per example), so let's consider this only at the package.xml level
it seems to be possible to consider using --ignore parameter as a workaround to not include those files.
And it seems not necessary to use sgd at the init as the whole repository content will be deployed anyway, unless we want to use sgd to generate the init package.xml (which is smart).

Solution space

Here are the solution I can imagine for now (by order of preferences):

improve the plugin to not add in the package.xml element that are not metadata compliant (generic solution)
have a default .sgdignore used by the plugin when -i is not used (use it instead when filled) (configurable solution that would require maintenance to black list new elements)

Let's think/spike on that, maybe more solution will raises and maybe more people will need it or explain something similar which will help us shape another solution !

mehdicherf · 2023-03-31T09:58:40Z

@scolladon My 2 cents:
IMO it's a minor issue since there is a workaround (--ignore), and it does not happen often (only once, when you initiate the repo). Still, in my view, it's an issue, as it not expected to have element that are not metadata compliant in the package.xml.

I don't have a definitive opinion as whether it should be in the output folder containing incremental changes. But for sure it should not be in the package.xml.
Meaning that we should not have this kind of package.xml generated by SGD, as it's not something we would deploy:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Package xmlns="http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata">
    <types>
        <members>.eslintrc</members>
        <name>LightningComponentBundle</name>
    </types>
    <version>57.0</version>
</Package>

So, I would vote solution # 1!

nvuillam · 2023-03-31T11:12:47Z

@scolladon as discussed, I also vote Solution 1 : avoid items that are not metadata in package.xml, without having to add extra parameters to the command :)

AllanOricil · 2023-03-31T19:20:43Z

I couldn't reproduce this. I ran sgd without passing a .sgdignore in a brand new sfdx project, and nothing was added in the package.xml. Then I created a dummy lwc, added a new commit, ran sgd again, and finally verified that only the lwc was included. Then I deleted .forceignore, repeated the previous steps, and again verified only the lwc was included in the package.xml.

AllanOricil · 2023-03-31T19:23:48Z

The same for aura. No .eslintrc. was inlcuded in the package.xml that sgd created

AllanOricil · 2023-03-31T19:29:49Z

I tested with 5.13.3 and 5.15.0

AllanOricil · 2023-03-31T19:33:52Z

more or less related #552

nvuillam · 2023-03-31T20:49:50Z

I didn't invent the issue ;)
But it happens only when you init a branch and when there is nothing in the master branch ^^
(Quite unconventional use but really useful for sfdx-hardis CI/CD projects :) )

scolladon · 2023-04-01T14:13:41Z

Hi @nvuillam

I just finalized a first draft of a PR (#554) to implement the solution 1.
If you could have a look at it and do the QA on your end and let us know your result (here or in the PR) it would be greatly appreciated!
Here are high level steps to do it.
(do not hesitate to contact me if those steps are not clear enough or if you have any blockers while doing those)

nvuillam · 2023-04-01T14:31:19Z

@scolladon of course :)
I'll just clone locally your branch, sfdx plugins:link and check with one of my use cases :)

AllanOricil · 2023-04-03T17:58:36Z

Somehow my previous tests were all wrong. Now that I have a test workbench repo in Github, I can kind see this problem.

In my case, Instead of end up having an .eslintrc entry in the package.xml, sgd adds workflow changes that are in the .github folder.

scolladon · 2023-04-03T19:57:03Z

Hi @AllanOricil

What is the SGD version running ?
Could you let me know how I can reproduce it locally ?
Can I access the repo you are mentioning and what command should I run to reproduce ?

What is the output of this command:

$ git diff --name-status --no-renames <from> <to>

AllanOricil · 2023-04-03T21:59:47Z

@scolladon

Im using sgd 5.16.0, but the issue also happens with 5.14.0.

This is the commit history of this repository

This is the output of git diff --name-status --no-renames ${{ inputs.FROM }} HEAD

scolladon · 2023-04-04T06:53:50Z

Thanks for those information @AllanOricil.

According to the output of the diff command the result is consistent with the actual behavior of the plugin.
We can see it reproduced by the github workflows file present in the package.xml.
As there is no changes detected by git related to .eslintrc.json file it is not processed by the plugin and does not appear in the package.xml.
It is the result of the same behavior internally, the fix shipped will fix both.

It is expected to have the issue with any previous version.
The fix (#554) is going to be shipped in the next release (available first in the latest-rc release channel).
Stay tuned!

github-actions · 2023-04-04T08:48:14Z

Shipped in release v5.17.0.
You can install the new version using the version number or the latest-rc channel

$ sfdx plugins:install sfdx-git-delta@latest-rc
$ sfdx plugins:install [email protected]

nvuillam · 2023-04-04T09:27:43Z

@scolladon sorry, just tested with @latest-rc and I still have .eslintrc.json :/

(but it's ok for the github workflow not appearing ^^ )

scolladon · 2023-04-04T09:51:07Z

Hi @nvuillam

Thanks for the feedback and for your time testing it.

I'm not able to reproduce it locally
I have a created a dedicated branch in our reproduction playground.

When you check it out:

$ git diff --name-status HEAD~3
A       .forceignore
A       .github/CODEOWNERS
A       .github/workflows/pull-request.yml
A       README.md
A       output/.keep
A       package.json
A       sfdx-project.json
A       sgd/reproduction/playground/aura/.eslintrc.json
A       sgd/reproduction/playground/classes/Test.cls
A       sgd/reproduction/playground/classes/Test.cls-meta.xml
A       sgd/reproduction/playground/lwc/.eslintrc.json

This is what we want to reproduce because it contains eslintrc.json and pull-request.yml github workflow files

When it executes using `v5.17.0``

$ sfdx sgd:source:delta -f HEAD~3 -d

$ cat output/package/package.xml
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<Package xmlns="http://soap.sforce.com/2006/04/metadata">
    <types>
        <members>Test</members>
        <name>ApexClass</name>
    </types>
    <version>57.0</version>
</Package>

$tree output
output
├── destructiveChanges
│   ├── destructiveChanges.xml
│   └── package.xml
├── package
│   └── package.xml
└── sgd
    └── reproduction
        └── playground
            └── classes
                ├── Test.cls
                └── Test.cls-meta.xml

The package.xml does not contains eslintrc.json nor pull-request.yml github workflow files

Maybe my setup to reproduce it is wrong.
Could you help me reproduce it @nvuillam ? What is the specificities of your setup ?

nvuillam · 2023-04-04T13:16:09Z

@scolladon everything you need is here :)

I also just noticed that the files are .eslintrc and not eslintrc.json, I don't know if it matters ^^

Edit: with the sample repo it's probably better :D https://github.com/nvuillam/git-delta-test

scolladon · 2023-04-04T13:48:03Z

Thank you very much @nvuillam

I cannot reproduce even using the repository provided.
Using v5.16.0 I can see the issue
Using v5.17.0 the issue is fixed

Here is the protocol used:

$ git clone https://github.com/nvuillam/git-delta-test.git
$ cd git-delta-test
$ git fetch -pPt
$ mkdir output
$ sfdx sgd:source:delta --from 59a9d219d7f0b9a89f75bcadb8ea6ca078d6e106 --to 51800a3ff84d52568bb43740c1fa4b39aba65c3d -d
$ cat output/package/package.xml
$ tree output

I suspect the issue is related to the environment (mac vs windows)
I'll try tonight with a Windows VM with git bash and let you

scolladon · 2023-04-04T17:22:18Z

I've been able to reproduce on Windows.
Thanks @nvuillam for your help here.
I'll ship a fix tonight.

Stay tuned !

github-actions · 2023-04-04T18:51:37Z

Shipped in release v5.17.1.
You can install the new version using the version number or the latest-rc channel

$ sfdx plugins:install sfdx-git-delta@latest-rc
$ sfdx plugins:install [email protected]

nvuillam · 2023-04-05T08:35:35Z

No more .eslintrc , I confirm this is ok with latest-rc, many thanks @scolladon :)

nvuillam added the bug Something isn't working label Mar 30, 2023

nvuillam assigned scolladon Mar 30, 2023

scolladon changed the title ~~[BUG NAME] Ignore .eslintrc.json~~ Ignore .eslintrc.json at init Mar 31, 2023

scolladon changed the title ~~Ignore .eslintrc.json at init~~ Ignore .eslintrc.json at project init Mar 31, 2023

scolladon changed the title ~~Ignore .eslintrc.json at project init~~ Ignore .eslintrc.json at project init Mar 31, 2023

scolladon added enhancement New feature or request and removed bug Something isn't working labels Mar 31, 2023

scolladon mentioned this issue Apr 1, 2023

feat: process lines related to metadata entity only #554

Merged

1 task

scolladon closed this as completed in #554 Apr 4, 2023

scolladon reopened this Apr 4, 2023

scolladon mentioned this issue Apr 4, 2023

fix: get parent folder name portability #562

Merged

scolladon closed this as completed in #562 Apr 4, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Ignore `.eslintrc.json` at project init #548

Ignore `.eslintrc.json` at project init #548

nvuillam commented Mar 30, 2023

scolladon commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

scolladon commented Mar 31, 2023

mehdicherf commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

scolladon commented Apr 1, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 1, 2023

AllanOricil commented Apr 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

scolladon commented Apr 3, 2023

AllanOricil commented Apr 3, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 4, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Apr 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 5, 2023

Ignore .eslintrc.json at project init #548

Ignore .eslintrc.json at project init #548

Comments

nvuillam commented Mar 30, 2023

scolladon commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

scolladon commented Mar 31, 2023

Framing the requirement

Solution space

mehdicherf commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

AllanOricil commented Mar 31, 2023

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading

scolladon commented Apr 1, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 1, 2023

AllanOricil commented Apr 3, 2023 • edited Loading

scolladon commented Apr 3, 2023

AllanOricil commented Apr 3, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 4, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023 • edited Loading

nvuillam commented Apr 4, 2023 • edited Loading

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023

github-actions bot commented Apr 4, 2023

nvuillam commented Apr 5, 2023

Ignore `.eslintrc.json` at project init #548

Ignore `.eslintrc.json` at project init #548

scolladon commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

mehdicherf commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

AllanOricil commented Apr 3, 2023 •

edited

Loading

scolladon commented Apr 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading

nvuillam commented Apr 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading