W-22164863: Address review comments and update backend request param#11
Conversation
acardel
left a comment
acardel
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good, I only left one comment.
| Replace `<package-version-id>` with the 04t ID of the package version you want to test. | ||
|
|
||
| ```bash | ||
| sf package install --package <package-version-id> --target-org <scratch-org-alias> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ukanoja-sf ,
I see that in cli we only mention the flow of installing a package.
The other valid flow is to do sf project deploy start to deploy the project, devs don't have to release a new package when developing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Updated the steps
| sf package install --package <package-version-id> --target-org <scratch-org-alias> | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| **Push source directly** |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would say "OR Push source directly"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we don't need to mention OR as text above mentions it by stating Make the package available in the scratch org. Some ways to do this include:
| char: 'l', | ||
| summary: messages.getMessage('flags.license.summary'), | ||
| exclusive: ['definition-file'], | ||
| relationships: [{ type: 'all', flags: ['namespace', 'quantity'] }], |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Eric mentioned this in his review....
Can we either:
- Remove the dependsOn and just use the relationships: [{ type: 'all', flags: ..... property for the namespace, license and quantity flags
OR - Remove the relationships property for license and use the dependsOn property for the namespace, license and quantity flags
Doesn't matter to me which one, we should just be consistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For now, can we replace the
with
https://github.com/salesforcecli/plugin-license-management#sf-license-provision
3 participants
What does this PR do?
namespacePrefixtonamespaceWhat issues does this PR fix or reference?
GUS: @W-22164863@
Local testing