Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Test site for new features #122

Open
dougy83 opened this issue Feb 24, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Test site for new features #122

dougy83 opened this issue Feb 24, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@dougy83
Copy link
Contributor

dougy83 commented Feb 24, 2024

I deployed a site which can be used for testing some new features, without taking out the original site with bad automerges and my bugs. This deployment is a side-effect of me needing to check if a workflow change I submitted actually worked (it initially didn't).

Site is https://dougy83.github.io/jlcparts/

Changes:
#114 new fast db update & search. Relates to/fixes issues #37, #45, #48, #109
#115 component count matching property. Relates to/fixes issues #76
#116 download results as CSV. Relates to/fixes issues #34
#117 filter by favourite components. Relates to/fixes issues #10
#120 (de)select all subcategories of the same name. Relates to/fixes issues #119
#121 search term negation. Relates to/fixes issues #103
#127 Range filtering for properties. Relates to/fixes issues #126

The database file is updated after copying the .json.gz and .stock.json from the original site a couple of hours after they are created, as the original site has already done the hard work cache.zip files from the original site a couple of hours after they've been updated.

@yaqwsx if this post is out of line, please delete it (or I can).

@yaqwsx
Copy link
Owner

yaqwsx commented Feb 24, 2024

It is completely fine! I was about to suggest submitting your PRs against https://github.com/yaqwsx/jlcparts-dev. Which is a development playground. Unfortunately, I cannot share API keys with you and this would be a way for you to test. However, the solution you came up with is also working and probably easier.

@dougy83
Copy link
Contributor Author

dougy83 commented Feb 24, 2024

Excellent. Cheers.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants