Skip to content

Conversation

@sduquej
Copy link
Contributor

@sduquej sduquej commented Jun 18, 2020

Fixes foo-software/lighthouse-check-orb#8
Similar to #29

Our setup requires that we're able to create urls dynamically. To do this we generate a config file before running the audit where we define urls. Because the CircleCI Orb always passes in urls as part of the CLI call we were running into a problem when the flags were being parsed as urls had no value and was consequently being evaluated as a boolean.

@sduquej
Copy link
Contributor Author

sduquej commented Jun 18, 2020

👋 @adamhenson, would really appreciate a review or guidance in getting this shipped. Happy to make any changes you think make sense. This is currently blocking us on using the lighthouse check effectively.

@adamhenson adamhenson self-assigned this Jun 18, 2020
Copy link
Collaborator

@adamhenson adamhenson left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice catch @sduquej, and thanks for adding the unit test. I'll pull in this change and publish a new version in the various projects. Will update you here shortly. Thanks again for contributing!

@adamhenson adamhenson merged commit ae8a504 into foo-software:master Jun 18, 2020
@sduquej
Copy link
Contributor Author

sduquej commented Jun 18, 2020

awesome, thank you!

@sduquej sduquej deleted the sd/empty-arrays-are-undefined branch June 18, 2020 21:27
@adamhenson
Copy link
Collaborator

adamhenson commented Jun 18, 2020

Hi @sduquej - I published the Docker image. In a standard case, you won't need to do anything (because the default Orb executor uses the latest Docker image) and just try re-running your job. If you can, let me know here if your issue is fixed.

I also added a test in the lighthouse-check-orb project:

https://github.com/foo-software/lighthouse-check-orb/blob/4eef641da65087c63c99771976c7a224742c9b62/.circleci/config.yml#L38-L43

@sduquej
Copy link
Contributor Author

sduquej commented Jun 18, 2020

Thanks @adamhenson! I can confirm our workflow is now passing.

@adamhenson
Copy link
Collaborator

Awesome! Thanks again for you help.

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.

TypeError: value.split is not a function when using configFile

2 participants