feat: STRF-9749 Update Stencil Cli to use node-sass latest by default #923
Conversation
jairo-bc
force-pushed
the
STRF-9749
branch
14 times, most recently
from
8eb51c5 to
0256c25
Compare
| throw new Error( | ||
| `${message}\n`.red + | ||
| `\n` + | ||
| `---------WARNING---------\n`.red + |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are you okay with such wordings or do we need to adjust?
cc @bookernath
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good 👍 is there some link we can provide to help people diagnose errors? Some node-sass documentation perhaps?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are bunch of links, that you need to really dig to understand the context:
https://github.com/sass/node-sass/releases/tag/v3.5.1 - the release, that broke and changelogs.
https://github.com/bigcommerce/cornerstone/pull/999/files#diff-7b10e2a8164a3ef7ccb5aa035f393c9715b8945fcc59613d455408c505dd42a5L4 - known example of broken theme case (cornernstone)
sass/libsass#1550 - code examples
sass/sass#779 - code examples
@bookernath Maybe we can include all of them into out changelog and show the link for the changelog?
CHANGELOG.md
Outdated
| @@ -1,9 +1,14 @@ | |||
| ### Draft | |||
|
|
|||
| - feat: strf-9749 Update Stencil Cli to use node-sass latest by default ([x](https://github.com/bigcommerce/stencil-cli/pull/x)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we include a proper PR number in this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's pretty much safe to merge it like that, I would still need to create a release PR and there double check the changelog.
What?
Stencil bundle and stencil push will now validate scss file against latest node-sass version. If it fails, it's still possible to bypass the error by using
--use-old-node-sass-forkTickets / Documentation
Screenshots (if appropriate)
cc @bigcommerce/storefront-team