## Description
fix build cache
Fixes #`Issue Number`
_or_
Fixes `Issue URL`
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced client build workflow with a new input parameter for branch
specification.
- Added support for PostgreSQL builds in the server build workflow.
- **Improvements**
- Improved caching mechanisms for both client and server builds to
optimize build times.
- Enhanced test execution logic to provide detailed reports on failed
tests.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Streamlined conditions for running builds and tests based on previous
execution states.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
commented files changed step. It is a notification step
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Modified the GitHub Actions workflow to simplify job flow by
commenting out the command execution for changes in the client folder,
effectively disabling that functionality.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
Reverted client profiled build script, we will instead generate a docker
custom image.
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/35184
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Sanity"
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!TIP]
> 🟢🟢🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉🎉🎉
> Workflow run:
<https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/10177617441>
> Commit: 3ff5d304aacb08cabb529b6553b2319d688000ff
> <a
href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=10177617441&attempt=1"
target="_blank">Cypress dashboard</a>.
> Tags: `@tag.Sanity`
> Spec:
> <hr>Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:52:14 UTC
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Bug Fixes**
- Removed the dependency on the `APPSMITH_CLOUD_HOSTING` environment
variable during the build process, streamlining the workflow and build
script.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
The `APPSMITH_CLOUD_HOSTING` env value is not accessible within the
client build script, we are fixing it by injecting it in the client
build workflow.
Fixes#35184
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Sanity"
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!TIP]
> 🟢🟢🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉🎉🎉
> Workflow run:
<https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/10161480342>
> Commit: 443c4ab7a6a08332efec5b7fd91927eeaf4e9707
> <a
href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=10161480342&attempt=1"
target="_blank">Cypress dashboard</a>.
> Tags: `@tag.Sanity`
> Spec:
> <hr>Tue, 30 Jul 2024 11:57:03 UTC
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Enhanced visibility of environment variables during the build process
with a debug echo statement.
- Introduced the `APPSMITH_CLOUD_HOSTING` environment variable in the
GitHub Actions workflow, improving configurability for various
deployment scenarios.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
This PR fixes failure in the CI build workflow. The workflow was failing
in `Put release build in cache` job. The workflow was failing because
while installing git lfs, there was a conflict with the newly added pre
push hook. git lfs also contains its pre push hooks which was
conflicting with our hooks. In this PR, I have configured the workflow
for git lfs pre push hooks to override appsmith pre push commit since
appsmith git hooks are not required during workflows.
Fixes #`Issue Number`
_or_
Fixes `Issue URL`
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Introduced a pre-push hook to ensure integrity by preventing
inadvertent pushes of certain files to the repository.
- **Improvements**
- Updated GitHub Actions workflow to enhance management of large files,
ensuring the latest configurations are applied before builds.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
The ADS compliance check relies on the condition
`github.pull_request.base.ref == 'true'`, but this variable just doesn't
exist. There's no `pull_request` under the `github` context, so this ADS
compliance check never worked.
If we want this check, we can add it later as part of the
`client-build.compliance.js` script. Here's a PoC for the record, based
on the intention I interpreted:
```javascript
function doADSCheck({core, github, context, affectedFiles}) {
const filesForADSCheck = affectedFiles.filter(f => (f.status === "added" || f.status === "modified") && f.filename.startsWith("app/client/src/"));
const violatedFiles = new Set();
for (const f of filesForADSCheck) {
const content = fs.readFileSync(f.filename, "utf8");
if (content.match(/(color|Color).*#|border.*#|(color|Color).*"/)) {
violatedFiles.add(f.filename);
}
}
if (violatedFiles.size === 0) {
return;
}
const body = [
"🔴 Below files are not compliant with ADS. Please fix and re-trigger ok-to-test",
...Array.from(violatedFiles).sort().map(f => "1. " + f),
].join("\n");
github.rest.issues.createComment({
owner: context.repo.owner,
repo: context.repo.repo,
issue_number: prNumber,
body,
});
}
```
/test sanity
We have a check when running Cypress tests to ensure that no new `.js`
files are added under Cypress folder. This PR moves this check to a
separate JS file. There's another check that does some ADS compliance,
which I'll port in a follow-up PR.
Why am I hitting on this? One, to move away from `umani/changed-files`
workflow, which has randomly failed for us in the past, and id doesn't
do so much special for us anyway. Two, this workflow is the last usage
of `APPSMITH_CI_TEST_PAT` secret, so I should be able to remove that
secret as well. One less secret.
## Description
By default the value of overwrite is false. In previous versions of
upload-artifact, this setting was implicit and true. Making this change
to fix the error `Failed to CreateArtifact: Received non-retryable
error: Failed request: (409) Conflict: an artifact with this name
already exists on the workflow run` in Github actions.
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [x] No
## Description
> [!TIP]
> _Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or
extremely technical (helps the content, marketing, and DevRel team)._
>
> _Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any
dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion,
Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR._
Fixes #`Issue Number`
_or_
Fixes `Issue URL`
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags=""
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!CAUTION]
> If you modify the content in this section, you are likely to disrupt
the CI result for your PR.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
## Communication
Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?
- [ ] Yes
- [ ] No
---------
Co-authored-by: yatinappsmith <84702014+yatinappsmith@users.noreply.github.com>
## Description
> [!TIP]
> _Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or
extremely technical (helps the content team)._
>
> _Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any
dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion,
Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR._
This is a maintenance fix that removes the warnings in our CI runs to
make it more readable.
Refer:
https://github.blog/changelog/2023-09-22-github-actions-transitioning-from-node-16-to-node-20/
> [!WARNING]
> _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the
maintainers if the issue is valid._
## Automation
/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Sanity"
### 🔍 Cypress test results
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
> [!IMPORTANT]
> Workflow run:
<https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8386795331>
> Commit: `2b1bfe7ed505ad9ba67bfe9211d50ebabb8ea0ce`
> Cypress dashboard url: <a
href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8386795331&attempt=1"
target="_blank">Click here!</a>
> All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated DockerHub login action across multiple workflows to version 3
for enhanced security and performance.
- Updated various GitHub Actions to newer versions in different
workflows for improved compatibility and performance.
- Modified file path pattern in a workflow step for consistency and
clarity.
- Updated setup actions for Java to version 4 for better Java
environment setup.
- Updated setup-node version in a workflow and adjusted comments for
Cypress test results.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
- update node version and appropriate git workflow
- added the path to webpack cache folder, this should speed up bundle
creation about a minute
[Test, build and push Docker
Image](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8421752151)
[Build Client, Server & Run only
Cypress](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8421752151)
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated actions/cache and actions/setup-node to v4 across various
workflows for improved caching and Node.js setup.
- Modified the `yarn install` command to use `--immutable` flag,
enhancing dependency management.
- **Documentation**
- Updated comments within workflows to include cautionary and important
notes, ensuring better clarity.
- **Refactor**
- Adjusted caching paths and keys for more efficient caching behavior.
- Changed Node.js installation to version 20.11.1 in Dockerfile,
aligning with the latest version for better performance and security.
- **Tests**
- Modified assertion in `getCurrentLocationSaga` test to check for the
presence of a property, improving test accuracy.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com>
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated GitHub workflow to include PostgreSQL client installation
steps.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
Added restore cache from git for client build
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
Tested in local fork
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [X] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [X] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [X] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [X] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [X] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [X] My changes generate no new warnings
- [X] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [X] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Optimized the client build workflow to trigger only on relevant
changes or specific events, ensuring resource-efficient operations.
- **Chores**
- Updated workflow conditions to improve the CI/CD process, enhancing
overall development efficiency.
- **Documentation**
- Provided triage instructions to streamline the handling of workflow
changes.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
Add Caching support for Client Build
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
Tested in a fork
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [X] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [X] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [X] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [X] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [X] My changes generate no new warnings
- [X] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [X] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Implemented caching for release builds to enhance performance.
- **Chores**
- Updated workflow to ensure successful status updates during build
processes.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated the build process to use a new self-hosted deployment runner
with enhanced resources.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
> added event_name schedule in client-build and rts-build to run them in
scheduled run as well
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
>
## Testing
> running TBP workflow to ensure nothing is impacted.
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] TBP Run
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated build workflows to trigger on scheduled events.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
- This PR makes changes to run the Client & Server unit tests in
parallel to Cypress for TBP workflow
- Removes invalid input restore-keys, adding cache-hit
- Remove save cache from /workflows/client-unit-tests.yml
- Making ci-test, client-unit-tests, server-unit-tests mandatory for
ci-test-result
#### Type of change
- Yml file update (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- TBP workflow run
## Checklist:
#### QA activity:
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after workflow run & tests were
identified to run parallel to cypress
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Updated GitHub Actions workflows to use the latest version of
`actions/checkout`.
- Improved CI/CD pipeline by adding conditional job definitions for
server and client unit tests.
- Enhanced workflow logic to differentiate between pull request and
branch push triggers for more accurate code checkouts.
- Streamlined caching strategy by removing `restore-keys` configuration
for better dependency management during builds.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
This code is duplicated from generate_info_json.sh script, but that's
temporary. We'll be moving towards not having the version computation in
the workflows at all, and all components getting version information
from `info.json` alone. Essentially treating `info.json` as the source
of truth for this.
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
> Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team)
>
> Please include a summary of the changes and which issue has been
fixed. Please also include relevant motivation
> and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change
>
> Links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant
to the PR
>
>
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
> if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers
about this first
>
>
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
- This change requires a documentation update
>
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Refactor**
- Adjusted indentation in the build workflow for improved readability
and consistency.
- **Documentation**
- No alterations to exported entities' declarations.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Arpit Mohan <mohanarpit@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated GitHub Actions workflows to use `actions/checkout@v4` for
improved performance and reliability.
- Removed `fetch-depth` parameter to simplify checkout steps across
various workflows.
- Standardized quote usage for consistency in workflow files.
- **Documentation**
- Adjusted formatting and descriptions in workflow files for better
clarity and readability.
- **Refactor**
- Aligned multiple workflow files to follow a consistent structure and
naming convention.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
fetch-depth 0 causes the Github workflow to checkout the entire Git
history. This is not required. We only need to check out the head of the
commit. By default, actions/checkout has fetch-depth=1, hence removing
it from the workflow completely for simplicity.
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Chores**
- Updated `umani/changed-files` action to v4.1.0 across various workflow
files.
- Updated `peter-evans/create-or-update-comment` action to v3 in
multiple workflow files.
- Minor adjustments to workflow syntax for consistency and accuracy.
- **Documentation**
- Corrected URLs in Slack notification messages to ensure accuracy.
- **Refactor**
- Removed redundant job configurations and steps related to caching and
storing run results.
- Streamlined environment variable usage by sourcing values from
secrets.
- **Style**
- Standardized quote usage in workflow files for file matching patterns.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed URLs in echo statements within `test-build-docker-image.yml` to
point to the correct "cypress-dashboard" path segment.
- Updated `slack_color` and `slack_icon` values to better reflect
success and failure states in notifications.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
Added workflow to check if there is any custom colors or hex codes is
being used. This workflow will be checking for the anomalies in the
entire file that has been changed by the developer.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/27839
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
---------
Co-authored-by: Saroj <saroj@appsmith.com>
## Description
- Get the newly added files from the PR branch instead of commits for ts
check
- CI improvements, now added cypress dashboard link with the comments in
PR
- CI improvements removed the steps which saves un-necessary cache
#### Type of change
- Workflow file changes
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- Workflow run
## Description
- Commented out the file check steps in client-build to unblock other
pr's and rework
#### Type of change
- Workflow file changes
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- Workflow run
## Description
- Skipping the ts check for test files if not required, introduced a
input variable for the client build to control this
#### Type of change
- Workflow file
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- Workflow run
## Description
- Added steps in client-build.yml to check the newly added files under
cypress/e2e
- Commenting in the PR with the file names in case of files written in
js
- Failing the workflow in the above case
#### Type of change
- client-build.yml changes
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- Workflow run
---------
Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
## Description
Separation to different steps of running lint, prettier, and jest unit
tests
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [x] Manual
- [x] Jest
- [x] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
Co-authored-by: Valera Melnikov <melnikov.vv@greendatasoft.ru>
## Description
- Updated the workflows to save and download the correct dependencies
cache
#### Type of change
- Workflow changes
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- CI run
## Description
1. Move everything related to client from app folder to client folder
(`.yarn`, `yarn.lock`, package.json, .gitignore)
2. Move `ast` and `rst` to client packages
3. Fix running scripts in packages
4. Add running unit tests in packages in CI
TODO: It is necessary to consider enabling the `nmHoistingLimits:
workspaces` option, since now all packages are hoisted to the root,
there may be issues with dependencies in workspaces. Also, there is a
possibility of implicit use of packages.
https://yarnpkg.com/configuration/yarnrc#nmHoistingLimits
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#23333
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [x] Jest
- [x] Cypress
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
Co-authored-by: Valera Melnikov <melnikov.vv@greendatasoft.ru>
## Description
Increased clientbuild runner
## Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## How Has This Been Tested?
- Manual
### Test Plan
None
### Issues raised during DP testing
None
## Checklist:
### Dev activity
- [X] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [X] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [X] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
### QA activity:
- [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or
manual QA
- [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after
Round 1/2 of QA
- [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test
