Skip to content

fix(script): restore previous CLI build logic #384

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 15, 2022
Merged

Conversation

shortcuts
Copy link
Member

@shortcuts shortcuts commented Apr 15, 2022

🧭 What and Why

🎟 JIRA Ticket: -

Changes included:

As seen in #383, changes in #371 introduced many changes regarding the JS build. This PR fixes issue at the CLI level of the monorepo:

  • Erase all dist folders
  • Does not build clients in parallel (memory issue, all runs for ~20 mins)
    • I've restored the previous logic, which prevent memory issue on the CLI and build all clients in ~5 mins.

This PR does not introduce changes on the rollup config other than what's in #383, so it should not interfere with @eunjae-lee's work but can allow us to work on JS clients until fixed.

🧪 Test

CI :D

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Apr 15, 2022

Deploy Preview for api-clients-automation canceled.

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 5e5cfce
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/api-clients-automation/deploys/62596b9f05933700096045df

@shortcuts shortcuts self-assigned this Apr 15, 2022
@algolia-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

algolia-bot commented Apr 15, 2022

✗ The generated branch has been deleted.

If the PR has been merged, you can check the generated code on the main branch.

Copy link
Collaborator

@millotp millotp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

good ol' code

@@ -95,14 +95,18 @@ function getUtilConfigs() {
];
}

function isClientBuilt(client) {
function shouldBuildUtil(utilClient) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You can rebase on #383 to avoid touching this file.
Or not if you want to merge fast

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That's what I did first but since @eunjae-lee is off and I want to keep working on JS client it's better for me to merge :D

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