-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
Upgrade to SF4 #81
Upgrade to SF4 #81
Conversation
51203bc
to
6eef153
Compare
Installing and compiling assets and deps is already done by the build server
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.
Tested in our dev-enviroment, and it's still functioning as expected. I'll leave the code-nitpicking to @MKodde
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.
Great work! And thanks for committing atomic changes. That made reviewing a breeze. I'm working on a functional review, but setting up the dev-env is somewhat of a challenge.
@@ -51,7 +51,7 @@ before_script: | |||
|
|||
# Install dependencies | |||
- cp .env.ci .env | |||
- cp config/packages/parameters.yaml.dist config/packages/parameters.yaml | |||
- cp config/packages/parameters.yml.dist config/packages/parameters.yml |
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.
Nitpick, consider squashing this with bd0848aa^^
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.
To be honest. IMO we should squash this whole PR since the individuals commits are worthless.
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.
From my functional test, found two more findings. They both are touching on the Node/NPM version that is being installed.
Came back from the dentist, did a functional review. I created a development environment as described in the Some other findings:
|
Feel free to merge this and fix some of the points on other PR's/stories. Maybe refer in this PR to those stories to keep things organized. |
yes, please open additional stories for this since its unrelated to this PR. |
Creating issues for 1.1 and 1.2 is fine with me, but 2 might be part of the SF4 upgrade. Having an installation without excessive deprecation warnings is part of the upgrade. But I'm fine with addressing them on a successive PR to prevent adding to this big change set. Are you okay with that proposal? |
Agree that it should clutter logs with warnings but, the demo/sp is only used for testing and I've checked the deprecation warnings but they are actually from vendor packages? |
As discussed with @MKodde we will create additional stories to resolve deprecation warnings. |
Migrate to sf4.