Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

add file exists check to prevent override of existing .gitignore file… #1630

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Jul 8, 2022
Merged

add file exists check to prevent override of existing .gitignore file… #1630

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
d3d6ef7
add file exists check to prevent override of existing .gitignore file…
maxgaurav Apr 29, 2022
097d53f
change fileExists to be synchronous
maxgaurav May 19, 2022
847192b
fix formatting issue in add actions
maxgaurav May 19, 2022
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
17 changes: 16 additions & 1 deletion actions/new.action.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Expand Up @@ -203,7 +203,12 @@ const initializeGitRepository = async (dir: string) => {
const createGitIgnoreFile = (dir: string, content?: string) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
const createGitIgnoreFile = (dir: string, content?: string) => {
const createGitIgnoreFile = async (dir: string, content?: string) => {

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi sorry for the dealy in response. Got stuck in my main project. I have no problem doing it this way, I was just trying to get the flow what was already there. If needed I can change.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe async/await will be better to follow

const fileContent = content || defaultGitIgnore;
const filePath = join(process.cwd(), dir, '.gitignore');
return promisify(fs.writeFile)(filePath, fileContent);
return fileExists(filePath).then(exists => {
if (!exists) {
return promisify(fs.writeFile)(filePath, fileContent);
}
return;
});
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why not use async/await here

Suggested change
return fileExists(filePath).then(exists => {
if (!exists) {
return promisify(fs.writeFile)(filePath, fileContent);
}
return;
});
const gitIgnoreFileExists = await fileExists(filePath);
if (!gitIgnoreFileExists) return promisify(fs.writeFile)(filePath, fileContent);

};

const printCollective = () => {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -250,4 +255,14 @@ export const retrieveCols = () => {
}
};

const fileExists = (path: string) => {
return promisify(fs.access)(path).then(() => true).catch((err: any) => {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

actually, I don't see any reason to use promises here because all the other tasks will need to wait the createGitIgnoreFile one

So can you replace fs.access by fs.accessSync?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just changed the flow to use the synchronous access and mainly reverted the createGitIgnoreFile to be mostly the same code except adding the check to file exist then it returns.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

can you run npm ci && npm run format to fix formatting issues?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

but only commit the actions/new.action.ts xD

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nvm, let me help you with that. I just ran that command myself

if (err.code === 'ENOENT') {
return false;
}

return Promise.reject(err);
});
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
}
};

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

On a separate note, this whole gitignore problem is there as the npm does not copy .gitignore files to the distributions. Since we are using angular schematics which allows template prefix/suffix to be added which can be automatically removed through the schematics build process. I have achieved the same for my collection
Reference: https://github.com/maxgaurav/nestjs-template-schematics

Would it be okay that do the same for the nestjs schematics as well by opening a PR which can allow managing of .gitignore file through schematics.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

sure! I'll close the PR #1649 then

Which means that we can close this PR as well, right? then after your fix on that schematics issue, we could open another one to drop the workaround implemented on this repo

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, makes sense. But form then the responsibility of having .gitingore file will be to the schematics, if not provided then gitingore will not be there in the project structure.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Once I complete the functionality I will map the pull request here for refernce.


export const exit = () => process.exit(1);