fix(gatsby-transformer-remark): restore behavior of serializing date-like fields to string #11716
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
DSchau
commented
Feb 12, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Validated fixed with https://github.com/DSchau/gatsby-11368
| let node | ||
| let actions | ||
| let createNodeId | ||
| beforeEach(() => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some light refactoring here to make this easier to use in the future
|
We're good to go! |
m-allanson
approved these changes
Feb 12, 2019
pieh
reviewed
Feb 12, 2019
| }) | ||
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| describe(`date formatting`, () => { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it worth mentioning here (maybe in comment) that this is only needed because there is bug in gatsby core that doesn't really allow sorting mix of date object and strings?
pieh
reviewed
Feb 12, 2019
| @@ -23,9 +26,13 @@ describe(`Process markdown content correctly`, () => { | |||
| }, | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| // Make some fake functions its expecting. | |||
| const loadNodeContent = node => Promise.resolve(node.content) | |||
| actions = { createNode: jest.fn(), createParentChildLink: jest.fn() } | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we do:
let markdownNode
beforeEach(() => { markdownNode = null})
createNode: jest.fn(markdownNode => createNode = node)
to avoid those returns in source? return {} is very confusing to read (without looking at tests)
3 tasks
cheezenaan
added a commit
to cheezenaan/blog
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
to fix issues with sort fields ref. * gatsbyjs/gatsby#11368 * gatsbyjs/gatsby#11716
cheezenaan
added a commit
to cheezenaan/blog
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 13, 2019
to fix issues with sort fields ref. * gatsbyjs/gatsby#11368 * gatsbyjs/gatsby#11716
gurpreet-hanjra
pushed a commit
to gurpreet-hanjra/gatsby
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 14, 2019
…like fields to string (gatsbyjs#11716) * chore: commit * chore: get tests failing (intentionally) to then fix * chore: de-dry * chore: finish tests * chore: revert relative import
pragmaticpat
pushed a commit
to pragmaticpat/gatsby
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 28, 2022
…like fields to string (gatsbyjs#11716) * chore: commit * chore: get tests failing (intentionally) to then fix * chore: de-dry * chore: finish tests * chore: revert relative import
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
This PR reverts behavior in gatsby-transformer-remark so that date-like fields are serialized to string. This fixes a bug that some were experiencing where content types with a date string were sorted differently than content types with a date object, e.g. this change will revert the behavior so that the below two posts are sorted the same
Note that I do think this was a good change, so we'll want to consider perhaps reverting this and baking in better support in the resolvers for sorting these date fields in the future. But for now--we should revert to avoid breaking people's apps.
Related Issues
Fixes regression in #10924