# Simplify package scripts
This PR's purpose is to raise a discussion surrounding our current
package scripts.
It includes some suggestions that aim to simplify the scripts and
hopefully bring a much more straightforward approach to developing and
contributing to Unleash.
Building (prod) should only happen **explicitly** and when needed.
## Before PR (current behavior)
- Clone the project;
- Open 2 terminals: One for `unleash` and another for
`unleash/frontend`;
- On `unleash`:
- Run `yarn` (which will also build, for some reason?);
- Run `yarn start:dev` to start backend in dev mode (`tsc-watch`);
- On `unleash/frontend`:
- Run `yarn` (which will also build, for some reason?);
- Run `yarn start` to start frontend in dev mode (`vite`);
So it seems to me like we build unnecessarily every time we install
dependencies. Neither dev scripts need to build the project, as backend
uses `tsc-watch` and frontend uses `vite`. I'm unsure why this is the
case, as building can take a very long time.
There's also some complexity in the way we need to split the terminal to
`cd` into `frontend` and treat it as a different project. The fact that
we have different script names is also confusing (`yarn start`, `yarn
start:dev`, etc).
## After PR
- Clone the project;
- Run `yarn` to install all dependencies;
- Run `yarn dev` to get started developing Unleash;
Running `yarn` should take care of everything needed to start
developing. This includes installing dependencies for frontend as well.
It should not build projects if we are not being explicit about it,
especially since we don't need to build them at this stage.
Running `yarn dev` should start the project in dev mode. This means
running both projects in `dev` mode, which for `backend` means running
`tsc-watch` and for `frontend` means running `vite`.
Here this PR attempts to provide a better DX by using
[concurrently](https://www.npmjs.com/package/concurrently) and
[wait-on](https://www.npmjs.com/package/wait-on) - This means both tasks
are ran simultaneously, stdout is labeled accordingly, and are stopped
together. It also means that `frontend` waits for `backend` to be
serving at `4242` before starting, since `frontend` starts pretty much
immediately with `vite` and `backend` takes a bit longer. Of course,
when the `backend` is hot-reloading you may still find some
`ECONNREFUSED`s on `frontend` stdout while it recompiles.
No more splitting your terminal and treating `frontend` as a separate
project.
## Discussion points
Maybe there's a better alternative to `tsc-watch`? I briefly explored
some alternatives and while they had a much faster starting speed,
hot-reload was sometimes slower. IMO we should aspire to run
`src/server-dev.ts` directly and only compile when needed.
Running `dev:backend` still serves a version of the frontend (at 4242).
**Why? Can we remove that behavior?**
I can't imagine a scenario in dev where we wouldn't want to run the
latest version of the frontend with `vite`.
~~**Note:** This PR removes all other out-of-scope scripts to focus on
this revamp. If we decide to merge it, we should evaluate what other
existing scripts we still want to include. May be a good opportunity to
clean up unused ones and only include the ones we really use. This
includes scripts that our GH actions rely on.~~
**Update:** In an effort to minimize impact surface of this PR and make
it a bit more ready for merging:
- It updates some docs in
2a4ff805e8
and
1bbc488251
to reflect our new simplified flow;
- It includes the old package scripts for now in
039bc04699;
- It updates some of our GH actions to reflect the new scripts in
7782cb9b12;
Given its current status I'll promote the PR to "ready for review".
I still think we should have a second look at our existing scripts and
GH actions to see what we really need and/or should adapt, but it should
be a team effort so we have a broader context. Maybe on a follow-up PR.
Does this require any changes to related projects (e.g. Enterprise)?
---------
Co-authored-by: Gastón Fournier <gaston@getunleash.io>
This PR revamps e2e tests, while adding a new one for the interactive
demo guide:
- Bumps Cypress from `9.7.0` to `12.11.0`;
- Bumps Cypress GH action from `v2` to `v5`;
- Makes any adjustments needed;
- Fixes a lot of issues identified with existing tests;
- Adds new `demo.spec.ts` e2e test that covers the entire demo guide
flow;
**Note:** Currently does not include `demo.spec.ts` in the GH action, as
it
[fails](https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/actions/runs/4896839575/jobs/8744137231?pr=3656)
on step 2.13 (last step of "user-specific" topic). It runs perfectly
fine locally, though.
Might be placebo, but in general tests seem less flaky now and they may
even be faster (especially when not adding the `demo` one, which would
always take a long time).
I've copied most of the descriptions from what we did for batch metrics
under the Edge tag, however there are a couple of top level descriptions
that are "fine" but I'm definitely open to suggestions.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
https://github.blog/changelog/2022-10-24-npm-v9-0-0-released/ introduced
a breaking change in the way they handle files inside package.json which
caused some issues with the way we pack and distribute Unleash:
> npm pack now follows a strict order of operations when applying ignore
rules. If a files array is present in the package.json, then rules in
.gitignore and .npmignore files from the root will be ignored.
What we discovered is that when having a nested .gitignore (the one we
have inside frontend), `npm publish` was taking that nested .gitignore
into account (despite the fact that we also have a package.json with
files inside the same folder). We tricked this by removing the `build`
folder from `frontend/.gitignore` and instead adding it into the root
`.gitignore` which is being ignored by `npm publish` following what's
stated in the release note above.
-----------------
Co-authored-by: Gard Rimestad <gard@getunleash.io>
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
After discussions around e2e tests:
- Became clear that the intention is to test core functionality only
Removing 2 test files:
- notifications.spec.ts : because all PRs are run against the same
heroku backend - no guarantee that more notifications will not happen as
other tests run - so the test is flaky
- settings.spec.ts: depends on instance being enterprise and a flag on
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
Adds proper typescript support.
Created reusable commands
Added README for cypress test
Refactored tests
Fixed bugs as I found them.
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
This is based on @nunogois suggestion to split the build in two, so we
don't build the frontend every time we run `yarn`
e2e frontend tests were forced to run by modifying frontend/README.md
### Important files
Some github actions had to be updated to also build the frontend. The
Dockerfile building our docker image was also looked into but it should
work as is
## Discussion points
This is a potentially risky operation as we might overlook something
that requires building the frontend which might lead to invalid builds.
We need to make sure when we do this we don't have any release planned.
## About the changes
This enables strictNullChecks which will give us nice hints in our IDEs
to avoid introducing more and hopefully will encourage us to fix some of
the existing problems.
Also:
1. The compiler explicitly ignores these errors
2. The "null checks action" still verifies we're not introducing new
ones.
The combination of these two things should help us to reduce the number
of nulls
For testing that the action still works (cause it was modified), [a
commit](5c4b818d1a)
was added introducing a bunch of null check errors:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/actions/runs/4364648191/jobs/7632224720
## About the changes
This is a small improvement adding more context to the comment message
when this action fails.
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## About the changes
- Actions are not counting successfully:
https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/actions/runs/4181713524/jobs/7243938807#step:5:17
- This should fix an issue with running yarn concurrently (which might
be leading to the zero counts)
- Move the code to a GH action so it's easier to debug
- Added a diff of the reported errors to help the PR author identify the
potential cause
[](https://renovatebot.com)
This PR contains the following updates:
| Package | Type | Update | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| [docker/login-action](https://togithub.com/docker/login-action) |
action | major | `v1` -> `v2` |
---
### Release Notes
<details>
<summary>docker/login-action</summary>
### [`v2`](https://togithub.com/docker/login-action/compare/v1...v2)
[Compare
Source](https://togithub.com/docker/login-action/compare/v1...v2)
</details>
---
### Configuration
📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined),
Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).
🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you
are satisfied.
♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the
rebase/retry checkbox.
🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update
again.
---
- [ ] <!-- rebase-check -->If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check
this box
---
This PR has been generated by [Mend
Renovate](https://www.mend.io/free-developer-tools/renovate/). View
repository job log
[here](https://app.renovatebot.com/dashboard#github/Unleash/unleash).
<!--renovate-debug:eyJjcmVhdGVkSW5WZXIiOiIzNC4xMDUuNCIsInVwZGF0ZWRJblZlciI6IjM0LjEwOC40In0=-->
Co-authored-by: renovate[bot] <29139614+renovate[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
## What
This change fixes the `generate-docs` workflow, so that they'll run
daily as a cron job. The `schedule` property had been erroneously listed
as a sub-property of the `workflow_dispatch` property.
## Why
The way the docs are set up at the moment, they source a lot of their
content from external repos. As it stands, we don't listen for update
events in all of those external dependencies, so we don't know when they
update. We do still want the docs to be reasonably fresh, though.
So to achieve this, we can run this workflow once a day to make sure
that no docs are more than 24 hours old.
Add Tag dialog redesign to allow batch add
Some Refactoring
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes
[1-611](https://linear.app/unleash/issue/1-611/create-a-auto-complete-component-for-tags)
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/104830839/216286897-4e392822-57c2-4e50-a5d8-e89d006b3fa5.mov
---------
Signed-off-by: andreas-unleash <andreas@getunleash.ai>
* refactor: user creation screen cleanup
* feat: deprecation notice for google sso
* fix: docs openid typo
* invite link bar
* invite link page
* fix prettier docs
* regenerated openapi
* hooks for invite page api
* update openapi
* feat: invite link update
* feat: add public signup token soft-delete
* public signup frontend feature flag
* fix: new user api issues
* feat: allow for creating new user from invite link
* Feat/invite user public controller (#2106)
* added PublicInviteController for public urls
* added PublicInviteController for public urls
* added PublicInviteController for public urls
* added PublicInviteController for public urls
* fix test
* fix test
* update openapi
* refactor: password reset props
* fix: public invite schema and validation
Co-authored-by: Fredrik Strand Oseberg <fredrik.no@gmail.com>
* user invite frontend
Co-authored-by: Fredrik Strand Oseberg <fredrik.no@gmail.com>
* invite link delete confirmation dialog
* refactor: password reset action
* fix: new user invite loading state
* fix: run ts check with ci
* revert openapi changes
* fix: invite token api interface
* fix: openapi schema index
* fix: update test snapshots
* update frontend snapshot
* fix: prettier ci
* fix: updates after review
Co-authored-by: andreas-unleash <104830839+andreas-unleash@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Fredrik Strand Oseberg <fredrik.no@gmail.com>
* fix: support coverage reports on external PRs
* removed the coverage comment on the PR until we can investigate this further
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.ai>
## What
This PR (finally 🎉) adds generated OpenAPI docs to the official Unleash documentation. In addition to generating docs when things get merged to main, it also pushes new doc updates every day at 12:00 AM (cron `@daily`).
## Why
Now that we have OpenAPI'd all the things, we can finally start using it. This will allow us to remove hand-written api docs from the documentation and should make sure everything is always kept up to date.
### Generating from us-hosted (Unleash enterprise)
Unleash has several different versions (open source, pro, enterprise). The versions do not necessarily have the exact same api surface. In fact, the enterprise version has a few endpoints that open source does not.
Because we want to have _all_ endpoints listed in the documentation we need to generated the docs from an enterprise spec. Which brings us into the next point:
### The need for scheduled jobs
Regarding the daily scheduled tasks to update the documentation: why do we need that?
The docs are generated from the tip of the main branch. For most of the docs, this is good and something that we want. However, because the OpenAPI docs are generated from the enterprise edition, it _will not be in sync_ with the open source main branch.
Also, we probably do not want the docs to list the current bleeding edge api changes. Instead, we should prefer to use the latest enterprise release (roughly). However, because we don't get notified when this version is released and deployed, we'll instead run the API generation on a daily cadence.
This isn't the perfect solution, but it's simple and gets us 80% of the way there. More intricate solutions can be set up later.
## How
- By adding a scheduled workflow to the generate docs config.
- By adding .gitignore entries for the generated files
There's also some minor changes in styling etc.
## Dependencies
This is dependent on the changes introduced in #2062 having propagated to the enterprise release, which will probably not be for another week or so.
## Discussion
What should the API reference docs url be? I've set it to be `/reference/api/unleash/*` for now, but I'm on the fence about whether it should be `apis` or `api` in there. I also want to get the proxy and other APIs in there as we grow.
-------
## Commits
* docs: style openapi operation buttons
* docs: minor operation badge adjustments
* docs: use permalink to css snippet i copied
* docs: ignore files related to openapi generation
* docs: re-enable openapi docs
* Docs(#1391): prep for integration
* docs(#1391): run docs generation daily
* docs(#1391): add generation step to doc prs too
* docs(#1391): use the US hosted instance to generate docs
* docs(#1391): move doc generation into build command
* docs(#1391): use `/reference/api/*` instead of `/reference/apis/*`
* Add e2e tests
* Remove cypress key
* Add project tag
* Add cypress to root
* Add cypress working directory and package.json in subfolder
* Remove record flag
* Add contains to url check
* Test segment e2e test
* Remove one of contains
* Test e2e tests
* Fix e2e
* Test new yml
* New yaml
* Test different echo
* Update workflows
* Fix deployment url
* Fix formatting
* fix: use the frontend dir from the backend
* Build is now working
* Fix workflows
* Fix workflows
* Fix build PRs
* Test coverage workflow
* Test coverage
* Test coverage run
* Fix jest report
* refactor: add missing frontend build
* refactor: ignore frontend dir for coverage
* refactor: run frontend build in PRs
* refactor: run backend tests in PRs
* Revert "refactor: run backend tests in PRs"
This reverts commit 22cabddfd1.
* refactor: remove unused frontend build file
* refactor: test workflows in PR
* refactor: use a prepare script for the frontend
* refactor: simplify yarn build scripts
* refactor: fix check-release script
* Revert "refactor: test workflows in PR"
This reverts commit 496ae19404.
* refactor: remove unused gitignore lines
* refactor: remove renovate config from the frontend repo
* refactor: remove frontend repo license
* refactor: remove frontend repo changelog
* refactor: update frontend repo readme
* refactor: add frontend node_modules to dockerignore
* refactor: update the docker yarn.lock snapshot
Co-authored-by: olav <mail@olav.io>
* feat: build docker containers when pushing to main
The intent here is to publish a docker container for every build of
main. This will make it easier to run the tip of main.
The `pull_request` hook runs in the context of the proposed changes. That means that for forks, this action won't have access to the required secrets for it to complete. As such, PRs from outside contributors won't work correctly.
The `pull_request_target` hook, however, runs in the context of the target branch, and thus has all the permissions it needs. The [github docs for this hook](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request_target) also indicate that this is the way to go:
> This event allows your workflow to do things like label or comment on pull requests from forks. Avoid using this event if you need to build or run code from the pull request.
## Interesting note for PRs
It seems that when this change is proposed as a PR, the expected action (_add new item to project board_) does not run. However, this does not affect other new PRs. Also, after merging it works as expected, for both external and internal contributors.
