You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 19, 2024. It is now read-only.
It's a big issue today to have the built output of the pack tool touch the original source files (because you have to unpack). While in place modifications can be useful for long CI flows (like the output from a TS compile), it's not ideal for normal JS scenarios. Not sure if we should actually support this, but it's worth thinking through what the workflows should be.
I'm actually working on this by copy the bundle, and the functions folder structure to the output directory.
If you'd be interested in, I can contribute the changes back.
The default folder is as following
dist
-- host.json
-- index.js
--function1
----funciton.json -> pointing to ../index.js
--funciton2
----funciton.json -> pointing to ../index.js
qs-wang
added a commit
to qs-wang/azure-functions-deploy
that referenced
this issue
Dec 11, 2017
…zure-functions-pack feature request. 1. default output is "dist", can specify via -o option, 2. create the funciotn folder strcuture in the dist folder, 3. copy over the function.json file and makes the chagnes there. The orgianl funciton.json file keeps untouched. 4. Copy over the host.json file to dist folder. In summary the dist folder contains the structure which is redy for uploading to azure. Node: unpack has not been tested.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
It's a big issue today to have the built output of the pack tool touch the original source files (because you have to unpack). While in place modifications can be useful for long CI flows (like the output from a TS compile), it's not ideal for normal JS scenarios. Not sure if we should actually support this, but it's worth thinking through what the workflows should be.
Related: #38, #35, #1
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: