Fix back stack for embedded apps #814
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could / should we have some tests for these changes? We could create a folder around this or add them to the existing AppProvider tests (which is the only place that will use this).
| ); | ||
| }) as LinkLikeComponent; | ||
|
|
||
| function parseUrl(url: string | undefined | null) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Total nit, but does undefined vs null matter here? It seems like we could just use undefined all around?
henrytao-me
force-pushed
the
shopify-app-bridge/issues/313/csb-back-stack
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e58a70d
to
9f2bda1
Compare
Co-authored-by: Paulo Margarido <64600052+paulomarg@users.noreply.github.com>
henrytao-me
force-pushed
the
shopify-app-bridge/issues/313/csb-back-stack
branch
from
9f2bda1
to
a2073de
Compare
| @@ -3,7 +3,8 @@ | |||
| "compilerOptions": { | |||
| "baseUrl": ".", | |||
| "outDir": "./dist/ts", | |||
| "rootDir": "src" | |||
| "rootDir": "src", | |||
| "types": ["@cloudflare/workers-types", "node", "jest", "jsdom"] | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wonder if it's worth creating a separate test config that extends this one and adds the jsdom types so we don't affect production builds with them. WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Production build uses tsconfig.build.json, doesn't it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
But it extends that one. We could also override the build config to set all types but jsdom, that would work :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🎩 via https://github.com/Shopify/app-bridge-next/pull/345
Agree on adding unit tests :)
|
Close as we are working on a solution that doesn't involve update in the template |
WHY are these changes introduced?
Resolves part of Shopify/shopify-app-bridge#313
WHAT is this pull request doing?
This PR fixes Link Component to work with back stack in embedded apps.
Type of change
Checklist
yarn changesetto create a draft changelog entry (do NOT update theCHANGELOG.mdfiles manually)