chore(storybook): minimal upgrade migration#5309
Conversation
|
Branch previewReview the following VRT differencesWhen a visual regression test fails (or has previously failed while working on this branch), its results can be found in the following URLs:
If the changes are expected, update the |
Tachometer resultsCurrently, no packages are changed by this PR... |
b361a04 to
6004f3f
Compare
| icon: html` | ||
| <sp-icon-edit hidden slot="icon"></sp-icon-edit> | ||
| `, | ||
| icon: `<sp-icon-edit hidden slot="icon"></sp-icon-edit>`, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This version is much stricter about safe template rendering. It's considered unsafe to call a template result via function inside another template result. This is the way to accomplish that same result.
| }, | ||
| ]; | ||
|
|
||
| export const tags = ['autodocs']; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can NOT wait for this to go live <3
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| export function watchSWC() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you know what this was doing or why its safe to remove this now?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes this was forcing rebuild of the assets when updates were made to the source files. Storybook handles this automatically and doesn't need us to manually kick this off any more. We can validate this by making changes to an existing asset and seeing it live refresh on the page. I'll add a test case for that when I start writing up validation steps.
| "@storybook/addon-designs": "^8.0.0", | ||
| "@storybook/addon-essentials": "^7.5.0", | ||
| "@storybook/addon-links": "^7.5.0", | ||
| "@storybook/web-components": "^7.5.0", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looks like this package was removed but this is how we set our custom manifest (the part you commented out in preview.js). Was this intentional or is it not supported in storybook 8?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does look like it comes with v8 support: https://www.npmjs.com/package/@storybook/web-components
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It may say that it's supported but there's some serious issues in that package. When I add the dependency, it adds this to our install logs (yes, it does the same if we bump all packages to 8.6.12 too):
When we add it in anyway despite the logged error, it blocks styles from loading. When I commented out the CEM loading, the arg types still loaded in the stories and the styles rendered. We can debug loading the CEM another way but I'm not sure this package is going to be it.
d596606 to
b4fd473
Compare
d5bc7ea to
1b26c82
Compare
1b26c82 to
0ae7e45
Compare
0ae7e45 to
73d269b
Compare
pfulton
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I pulled down this branch and ran it successfully on my local environment. Everything looked good, functioned as expected, and was speedy!
I love that this enables the AutoDocs stuff!
I dropped one nit comment here that is just a personal preference, but let me know what you think.
Otherwise, I think this should be good to go.
0788b9b to
f10e882
Compare
caseyisonit
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM - would love a fast follow to investigate the custom element manifest or automating the args table over the current implementation which is completely manual.
f10e882 to
f51747d
Compare
nikkimk
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As always, thanks for making our developer experience so much better!
| }, | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| export function watchSWC() { |
Description
This update migrations the SWC Storybook instance off of the
@web/storybook-builderand@web/storybook-framework-web-componentsand onto the latest breaking change (v8) release of@storybook/*andstorybookpackages.This update does not:
Had to remove the
maintained node versionsentry to the browsers list config because it was causing the Storybook build to fail:Related issue(s)
Motivation and context
Blog post
How has this been tested?
yarn start: expect no regressions to local StorybookScreenshots
Types of changes
Checklist
Best practices
This repository uses conventional commit syntax for each commit message; note that the GitHub UI does not use this by default so be cautious when accepting suggested changes. Avoid the "Update branch" button on the pull request and opt instead for rebasing your branch against
main.