Closed clairewu0218 closed 1 year ago
Do we have a plan on how to make these changes be consistent with our feature/JSSDK-server-side branch? I see this is branched off the main branch. Any reason why?
Package | Line Rate | Branch Rate | Complexity | Health |
---|---|---|---|---|
Microsoft.PowerApps.TestEngine | 93% | 91% | 764 | ✔ |
Summary | 93% (2032 / 2176) | 91% (471 / 518) | 764 | ✔ |
Minimum allowed line rate is 50%
Do we have a plan on how to make these changes be consistent with our feature/JSSDK-server-side branch? I see this is branched off the main branch. Any reason why?
Previously we used Playwright Page.EvaluateAsync
with expression and arguments for handling encoding cases. As we don't have full control over the parameters, it runs into format problems with TypeScript in the new SDK. This PR will make most of the SetProperty the same as the JSSDK feature branch so that we can merge these two in the near future. The only thing left would be the new change regarding JS encoding.
Do we have a plan on how to make these changes be consistent with our feature/JSSDK-server-side branch? I see this is branched off the main branch. Any reason why?
Previously we used Playwright
Page.EvaluateAsync
with expression and arguments for handling encoding cases. As we don't have full control over the parameters, it runs into format problems with TypeScript in the new SDK. This PR will make most of the SetProperty the same as the JSSDK feature branch so that we can merge these two in the near future. The only thing left would be the new change regarding JS encoding.
Okay that's great then. Given that we are supporting legacy (what main does now) even in our feature JSSDK branch. Thank you
Pull Request Template
Description
We used to use URI encoding to prevent JS script injection. This change is to using JSON encoding instead due to the fact that it's about JS code.
Checklist