feat(core): pattern matching for target defaults

[AgentEnder]

Current Behavior

TargetDefaults can be specified by keys matching either executor or target name only

Expected Behavior

TargetDefaults can match based on a glob pattern that may match the target name. This is useful for things like e2e-ci--*. Only 1 target default will ever apply to a given target. We recognize this may be confusing, but is inline with current handling. If no default matches the target name or key, the first default that matches by pattern will be used.

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

1 Skipped Deployment

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
nx-dev	⬜️ Ignored (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jul 11, 2024 10:16pm

[nx-cloud]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 4a01bc9. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution

---

✅ Successfully ran 1 target

• nx affected -t e2e-macos-ci --parallel=1 --base=0b0db782f7b121b71d52419db675b90fa3080010 --head=4a01bc9f3794d9444640f8273ee47b4282b1be46

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[FrozenPandaz]

Change this to find the pattern which is the longest character length wise.

[Cammisuli]

These are all the characters I found when doing the whole glob conversion stuff in the Rust side. Are they needed here as well (like the ?, @, etc)?

nx/packages/nx/src/native/glob.rs

Lines 110 to 124 in 0b0db78

	pub(crate) fn contains_glob_pattern(value: &str) -> bool {
	value.contains('!')
	|| value.contains('?')
	|| value.contains('@')
	|| value.contains('+')
	|| value.contains('*')
	|| value.contains('|')
	|| value.contains(',')
	|| value.contains('{')
	|| value.contains('}')
	|| value.contains('[')
	|| value.contains(']')
	|| value.contains('(')
	|| value.contains(')')
	}

[AgentEnder]

I don't think so... ?, @, +, ! are only valid in combination with paraenthises

[github-actions]

This pull request has already been merged/closed. If you experience issues related to these changes, please open a new issue referencing this pull request.