https://netsuiteprofessionals.com logo
Join SlackCommunities
Powered by
Resolved :white_check_mark: Hello. After running`s...
# sdf
d
Resolved ✅ Hello. After running`suitecloud project:validate` . I am getting several errors that I do not get when using the webstorm plugin. The project was created using the webstorm plugin and I just recently got the suitecloud npm package.
Errors for file src/manifest.xml.
- Line No. 1 - Error Message: The following dependencies are missing from the manifest.xml file: [Feature - WMSSYSTEM:required]
Errors for file /netsuite/src/Objects/custform_activity_line_form.xml.
- Line No. 29 - Error Message: Invalid “id” reference key “RECORDID”.
This is what the field looks like
Copy code
<field>
          <id>RECORDID</id>
          <label>ID</label>
          <visible>T</visible>
          <mandatory>T</mandatory>
          <displayType>NORMAL</displayType>
          <columnBreak>F</columnBreak>
          <sameRowAsPrevious>F</sameRowAsPrevious>
        </field>
a
Client validatation and adddependencies use the same code internally
you can try to validate with server side adding the `--server`flag
Copy code
suitecloud project:validate --server
d
Okey, so what happened there, the server side validation was successful.
Does that mean that I am missing something locally that is present on the server?
a
nop
there's a bug in the client validation code
the server validation is the "master"
so if server passes, you are good for deployment
d
okey, neato 😄 thanks Albert!
a
👍
s
does the 'validate' command in the webstorm plugin perform a client side, or server side validation, and can we control which it is doing? @Albert Margarit (NS Eng Lead)
a
There are both: • validation (runs locally) • validation against account.. (runs server-side)
s
thanks, I didn't know that. I assumed plain 
validation
was against the default account, so good to know that one is actually local
though, I can't say I fully understand how local validation differs from server-side validation
a
local validation is performed with metadata that is shipped with the plugin (so it can get outdated if you don't update your plugin regularly). Server validation, packages the solution and sends it to the server for validation.
The general idea here was to provide fast validation errors with just client metadata. This was especially useful in Eclispe that also had inline validation features directly in the XML
s
oh. I'm finding that client validation and server validation are both slow - not sure if client is any faster but they qualitatively feel about the same?
a
maybe that's true
there's a lot of parsing required to do the validation
you are skipping the packaging and the network time, but still probably expensive in large projects
s
I'm dealing with 160-200 xml files in this one
not sure what the threshold for 'large' would be?
usually I'm deploying more like 10 or less things
5 Views
Open in Slack
PreviousNext
Powered by