-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
[PM-27564] Self-host configuration is not applied with nx build #17279
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
[PM-27564] Self-host configuration is not applied with nx build #17279
Conversation
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
| const NODE_ENV = process.env.NODE_ENV == null ? "development" : process.env.NODE_ENV; | ||
| const LOGGING = process.env.LOGGING != "false"; | ||
| const ENV = params.env?.ENV ?? process.env?.ENV ?? "development"; | ||
| const NODE_ENV = params.env?.NODE_ENV ?? process.env?.NODE_ENV ?? "development"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
While ENV and NODE_ENV use nullish coalescing for boolean/truthy checks, LOGGING uses != "false" which means:
params.env.LOGGINGundefined → falls through toprocess.env.LOGGING != "false"- If
params.env.LOGGINGisfalse(boolean), it becomes the value without the string check
This could lead to unexpected behavior if params.env.LOGGING is passed as a boolean false (it would be used directly) vs a string "false" (which would need the != check).
Consider making this consistent:
const LOGGING = params.env?.LOGGING ?? (process.env?.LOGGING != "false");There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was your code snippet the suggestion?
|
New Issues (7)Checkmarx found the following issues in this Pull Request
|
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #17279 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 41.12% 41.24% +0.12%
==========================================
Files 3544 3543 -1
Lines 101844 101963 +119
Branches 15265 15295 +30
==========================================
+ Hits 41879 42054 +175
+ Misses 58202 58145 -57
- Partials 1763 1764 +1 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
|
One thing you should also consider is that folks expect the self hosted web vault to run on a different port. This isn't configured in the web apps |




🎟️ Tracking
📔 Objective
📸 Screenshots
⏰ Reminders before review
🦮 Reviewer guidelines
:+1:) or similar for great changes:memo:) or ℹ️ (:information_source:) for notes or general info:question:) for questions:thinking:) or 💭 (:thought_balloon:) for more open inquiry that's not quite a confirmed issue and could potentially benefit from discussion:art:) for suggestions / improvements:x:) or:warning:) for more significant problems or concerns needing attention:seedling:) or ♻️ (:recycle:) for future improvements or indications of technical debt:pick:) for minor or nitpick changes