Support customization process part 1 #1960
Conversation
MaryGao
changed the title
| @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ | |||
| // Copyright (c) Microsoft Corporation. | |||
| // Licensed under the MIT license. | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Mainly test to generate in sources/generated/src folder if exists this sources folder
| let sourcesRoot = join(projectRoot, "src"); | ||
| const customizationFolder = join(projectRoot, "sources"); | ||
| if (await fsextra.pathExists(customizationFolder)) { | ||
| sourcesRoot = join(customizationFolder, "generated", "src"); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Have we decided to use sources/generated/src folder?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is the way of current openai implementation and customization tool supported. Personally I think sources/generated and sources/generated/src would work me. The latter one could give us more flexibility if in future we'd like to add more metadata or testing files in sources folder.
| rootDir: string; | ||
| rlcSourcesDir: string; | ||
| modularSourcesDir?: string; | ||
| metadataDir: string; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is rootDIr not equals to metadataDir ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally rootDir and metadataDir are the same, I proposed a new option because I will use rootDir to calculate if this is in sdk repo and I think using metadata one would be wired.
| const options: RLCOptions = transformRLCOptions(emitterOptions, dpgContext); | ||
| dpgContext.rlcOptions = options; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| const options: RLCOptions = transformRLCOptions(emitterOptions, dpgContext); | |
| dpgContext.rlcOptions = options; | |
| dpgContext.rlcOptions = transformRLCOptions(emitterOptions, dpgContext); |
Is this not working ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just realized options is being used somewhere else ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
wonder if there's any place that will modify the options causing them to be inconsistent.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I prefer to refactor this code in my next pr.
This is part of the pr - #1958
[Part 1] In this pr we would
[Part 2] Below would be covered in my next pr: