fix: Build failing #54
Conversation
✅ Deploy Preview for cuhacking-portal-test-deployment ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
From what I can tell, if we want to do this hot fix correctly, we should remove the post file all together. Doing this leads to some other issues we have to fix.
I understand why we haven't deleted it since appRouter needs to have procedures in it, otherwise we get other build errors. But for now, can't we define appRouter with a dummy procedure that just prints "hello, world"? But I think it leads to less confusion later on. Thoughts @JowiAoun?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It won't cause many problems to have it like this for a day or two. They're basically all dummy procedures now. I have a team route in PR #12 which I will re-build and request reviews for one last time, so we can finally deprecate this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perfect, that sounds good to me 👍
| phone_number: null, | ||
| levels_of_study: null, | ||
| school: null, | ||
| userId: user.id, | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| await db.userInformation.create({ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I know we are in progress to migrate to Drizzle, so do we care that this isn't creating a link between the UserInformation Table and the User table?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Fixing this is kind of annoying, we have to deconstruct all values of userInformation, except for user.id. We could do const { userId, ...otherUserInformation } = userInformation
data: {
...otherUserInformation,
user: {
connect: {
id: userId,
},
},
},
We'd obviously following better naming conventions. This is just an example of how we'd fix this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Weird enough, the schema has the id automatically defined, but is still required to be defined in the userInformation object. Since we are in the process of moving to Drizzle, I will leave it as is but good eye.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good to know, was just checking 👍
|
Im guessing these tests should be failing at the moment because of our issues with |
After further testing with @HasithDeAlwis note: |
Isn't this jsut because we don't have |
This PR is meant to fix all build issues on the main branch since the initial commit.
Some of the bug fixes have been:
postcode, not entirely as at least one route is required. Its non-existence in the database caused build errors. This route should be fully discarded once a needed route is created.userInformationobject in the authentication file, which had a duplicateuserIdattributenextwhile running the development server.Note: I haven't messed around with
bunhere, but it was just not installed on the repo. This still usespnpm, and was aimed to only fix the build issues.