You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I've run across a number of ACS and partner projects who are modifying aem.js as their default way of changing things, as opposed to doing it in scripts.js. I view modifying aem.js as not necessarily verboten, but to be avoided when possible.
But my thought would be to have the PR workflow check the hash against a known value, and if it doesn't match, print a message indicating to use caution when modifying, etc.
If the project really wants to or needs to, they can update the hash in the pr script and move on, but should at least encourage the right behavior. thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If the project really wants to or needs to, they can update the hash in the pr script and move on, but should at least encourage the right behavior. thoughts?
It can also be more of a warning that can be overridden similar to PSI check today.
Consider this an idea more than concrete proposal
I've run across a number of ACS and partner projects who are modifying aem.js as their default way of changing things, as opposed to doing it in scripts.js. I view modifying aem.js as not necessarily verboten, but to be avoided when possible.
But my thought would be to have the PR workflow check the hash against a known value, and if it doesn't match, print a message indicating to use caution when modifying, etc.
If the project really wants to or needs to, they can update the hash in the pr script and move on, but should at least encourage the right behavior. thoughts?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: