Closed zto-sbenning closed 1 month ago
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
Name | Status | Preview | Comments | Updated (UTC) |
---|---|---|---|---|
next-roots-wcmb | ✅ Ready (Inspect) | Visit Preview | 💬 Add feedback | Jul 23, 2024 7:16am |
Should we consider splitting this test to be more isolated ? Any guidance would be appreciated.
IMO this time we can keep it as it is. The reason I previously asked for isolation was that you created test called should create layout with generate static params
but included even metadata into it. This time the test already says that it expects both static params and metadata to be included. So overall it is more about DX that if test fails and we look in a description/test name it matches what is actually done inside the test.
@zto-sbenning LGTM thank you 👍 once you publish this we can merge it.
:tada: This issue has been resolved in version 3.10.0 :tada:
The release is available on:
Your semantic-release bot :package::rocket:
Description
In order to support the "Generate params from the top down" pattern of nextjs, we now pass the
params
received bygenerateStaticParams
to the origin functiongenerateStaticParamsOrigin
fix #242
Question
I'm unsure about the modification required for the test
"should create page for [dynamic] route with generate static params and generateMetadata functions"
insrc/cli/templates/page-tpl.test.ts
.The actual test is targeting both
generateMetadata
andgenerateStaticParams
. And so, I just changed the expected parameter forgenerateStaticParams
.Should we consider splitting this test to be more isolated ? Any guidance would be appreciated.
Note: This PR is marked as a draft until I receive feedback on the test modification.