Skip to content

fix: providing cwd matching the root dir and filter option conflicted… #7366

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
Jun 25, 2025

Conversation

VitaliyR
Copy link
Contributor

… preventing functions to be discovered

🎉 Thanks for submitting a pull request! 🎉

Summary

Fixes EX_184
Preview Server always provides a cwd matching the root dir. But since it was provided - the filter option started to conflict, so edge function dir never set hence functions are never "discovered".


For us to review and ship your PR efficiently, please perform the following steps:

  • Open a bug/issue before writing your code 🧑‍💻. This ensures we can discuss the changes and get feedback from everyone that should be involved. If you`re fixing a typo or something that`s on fire 🔥 (e.g. incident related), you can skip this step.
  • Read the contribution guidelines 📖. This ensures your code follows our style guide and
    passes our tests.
  • Update or add tests (if any source code was changed or added) 🧪
  • Update or add documentation (if features were changed or added) 📝
  • Make sure the status checks below are successful ✅

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory, but encouraged)

@VitaliyR VitaliyR requested a review from a team as a code owner June 25, 2025 19:45
Copy link

📊 Benchmark results

Comparing with 73a7d46

  • Dependency count: 1,105 (no change)
  • Package size: 277 MB ⬇️ 0.00% decrease vs. 73a7d46
  • Number of ts-expect-error directives: 399 (no change)


// if cwd matches process.cwd, act like cwd wasn't provided
if (resolvedCwd === processCwd) {
delete flags.cwd
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this the main change? I'm kinda confused on what behavior has changed because it seems like we're still resolving to the cwd from the flag or process.cwd()

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Down the process it is being check

!flags.cwd &&

@VitaliyR
Copy link
Contributor Author

Confirmed fix in RC

@VitaliyR VitaliyR merged commit 7a27b4f into main Jun 25, 2025
53 of 54 checks passed
@VitaliyR VitaliyR deleted the vitaliir/EX-184 branch June 25, 2025 22:46
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.

2 participants