-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.4k
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
Core: added .entries property to error thrown when duplicate stories are present #20038
Core: added .entries property to error thrown when duplicate stories are present #20038
Conversation
…r>choseDuplicate method error thrown when duplicate stories are present
Hey @yuri-scarbaci-lenio looks like maybe you need to re-install in I'm not sure attaching that extra field to the error will show up the node console will it? |
Hello @tmeasday I tested plain am I missing some sort of error handling that storybook core-server is doing under the hood that I should look out for? |
…EntriesError exception
Since I got atleast regarding wheter or not the If Storybook does have a custom logger that will instead only log the |
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.
LGTM!
Oh, nice pickup @YuriScarbaci. Perhaps you could open an issue about the space thing and someone from the community could take a look at it. Thanks for this PR, it is great! If the logging is working for you I think we are good. |
Issue:
What I did
As per #19094 I extended the
Error
thrown atStoryIndexGenerator.ts > chooseDuplicate
method to include the full information from the entries being comparedHow to test
If your answer is yes to any of these, please make sure to include it in your PR.
Extra info
I tried running the process as per https://github.com/storybookjs/storybook/blob/next/CONTRIBUTING.md and
yarn start
is failingalso, since this failed, I could not run
yarn test
eitherThis PR is pretty straightforward couple liners anyway, so maybe we don't need those steps?