Skip to content

chore: Add additional metadata #81

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
May 14, 2025
Merged

chore: Add additional metadata #81

merged 1 commit into from
May 14, 2025

Conversation

YueyingLu
Copy link
Member

Description

Adding additional metadata after this change cloudscape-design/component-toolkit#132

How has this been tested?

Review checklist

The following items are to be evaluated by the author(s) and the reviewer(s).

Correctness

  • Changes include appropriate documentation updates.
  • Changes are backward-compatible if not indicated, see CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • Changes do not include unsupported browser features, see CONTRIBUTING.md.
  • Changes were manually tested for accessibility, see accessibility guidelines.

Testing

  • Changes are covered with new/existing unit tests?
  • Changes are covered with new/existing integration tests?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

@YueyingLu YueyingLu requested a review from a team as a code owner May 14, 2025 12:15
@YueyingLu YueyingLu requested review from Al-Dani and removed request for a team May 14, 2025 12:15
@@ -9,8 +9,10 @@ import {
useComponentMetadata,
} from "@cloudscape-design/component-toolkit/internal";

import { PACKAGE_SOURCE, PACKAGE_VERSION } from "../environment";
import { PACKAGE_SOURCE, PACKAGE_VERSION, THEME } from "../environment";
import { getVisualTheme } from "../utils/get-visual-theme";
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

one meta-question: why do we have this utils copied to all packages instead of component-toolkit?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 14, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 99.25%. Comparing base (43fd41a) to head (1044f0f).
Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main      #81      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   99.23%   99.25%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          29       29              
  Lines         260      268       +8     
  Branches       31       31              
==========================================
+ Hits          258      266       +8     
  Misses          1        1              
  Partials        1        1              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@YueyingLu YueyingLu added this pull request to the merge queue May 14, 2025
Merged via the queue into main with commit ab7efda May 14, 2025
39 checks passed
@YueyingLu YueyingLu deleted the add-metadata branch May 14, 2025 15:19
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.

3 participants