feat: new deploy diff by doc-han · Pull Request #1352 · OpenFn/kit

doc-han · 2026-04-02T07:34:35Z

Short Description

Add a rich diff and JSON diff readout to openfn project deploy

Fixes #1182

AI Usage

Please disclose whether you've used AI anywhere in this PR (it's cool, we just
want to know!):

I have used Claude Code
I have used another model
I have not used AI

You can read more details in our
Responsible AI Policy

doc-han · 2026-04-02T07:49:45Z

Issue I'm dealing with while doing manual testing. cc: @josephjclark
trying to get this resolved at the moment

doc-han · 2026-04-02T14:35:16Z

Issue I'm dealing with while doing manual testing. cc: @josephjclark trying to get this resolved at the moment

The fix for this bug I was facing was sitting all the base in https://github.com/OpenFn/kit/blob/main/packages/project/src/util/base-merge.ts
The call to assign over there was mutating the value of target in-place making it lose the methods on workflows.

josephjclark · 2026-04-07T13:33:14Z

Issue: changing the id of a step results in this error:

[CLI] ✘ TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'name')
    at file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:279:57
    at Array.map (<anonymous>)
    at generateHash (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:276:46)
    at Workflow.getVersionHash (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:462:12)
    at findLocallyChangedWorkflows (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2277:35)
    at syncProjects (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2412:41)
    at process.processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:104:5)
    at async handler (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2507:24)
    at async parse (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:4126:12)

josephjclark · 2026-04-07T13:57:27Z

Issue: removing the configuration key doesn't seem to generate a diff (in the rich or the json one). But it should result in a change in the state.json right? I wonder if that's a wider bug

josephjclark · 2026-04-07T14:00:47Z

Issue: changes to edges don't seem to manifest in the rich diff (I do see them in JSON)

josephjclark

Looks really cool!

I've tested around a bit and found some issues. But before we go too much further I'm not sure the architecture is right, and I'd like to dig into that a bit with you later

doc-han · 2026-04-13T06:57:37Z

Suggestion: When a user hits divergence because the project on remote changed but the locally pulled project has zero changes since last pulled. openfn project pull should automatically do a --force pull. The user shouldn't have to explicitly pass --force
cc: @josephjclark

doc-han · 2026-04-13T07:57:13Z

Issue: changing the id of a step results in this error:

[CLI] ✘ TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'name')
    at file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:279:57
    at Array.map (<anonymous>)
    at generateHash (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:276:46)
    at Workflow.getVersionHash (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/project/dist/index.js:462:12)
    at findLocallyChangedWorkflows (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2277:35)
    at syncProjects (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2412:41)
    at process.processTicksAndRejections (node:internal/process/task_queues:104:5)
    at async handler (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:2507:24)
    at async parse (file:///home/joe/repo/openfn/kit/packages/cli/dist/process/runner.js:4126:12)

This has been resolved. It happens when you change the id of a job but then didn't do same for all edges referencing it. The error has been updated to print out a bit more meaningful message.

doc-han · 2026-04-13T08:30:34Z

I've done several manual testing on this and it works fine.
This morning I added a change which shows what changes for an edge.

josephjclark · 2026-04-16T09:34:26Z

This is looking absolutely lovely

Will be testing closely and might jump in a with a fix. Aiming to get this released today.

josephjclark · 2026-04-16T14:12:01Z

Struggling with the review because I'm hitting type issues. I've raised out #1381

I think I'll continue to test and validate this and then still aim to get this PR released today, even if it has type issues

josephjclark · 2026-04-16T14:15:43Z

+): StepChange[] => {
+  if (!localWf || !remoteWf) return [];
+
+  const localSteps = localWf.steps as any[];


Struggling here with:
a) the typing as any - this tells me that types are broken and I need to go off and fix that
b) we're not using provisioner state to do our diffing here- that was a core tenant of the issue

Now I'm going to relax on the provisioner state thing. The problem there is that in provisioner state we call it a body. but in your workflow.yam it's called expression. We have to relate the diff back in local terms.

It just opens up a gap between what we report on for the diff, and what diff factually materialises when we post to the server. Makes me nervous.

The JSON diff resolves this by doing a pure diff on the two JSON structures... but it'll report the diff with keys that may not be familiar. And of course the JSON diff might not necessarily be the same as the database diff (like you can add a key to the JSON that the provisioner will ignore, so it's not really a diff)

josephjclark · 2026-04-16T14:17:01Z

+  };
+};
+
+const TRACKED_FIELDS: Array<{ key: 'name' | 'adaptor' }> = [


This makes me a little nervous. Why not just diff on all keys? If we add a new key tomorrow then we'll have to patch the CLI to report a diff on it.

I get that we have special handling for some keys, like expression, but I sort of thing we should have a fallback of just reporting anything.

josephjclark · 2026-04-16T15:06:12Z

Ok here's what I've done:

I've added support for diffing configuration (not that this seems terribly useful)
I've made the diff reporter in the CLI a bit more generalised
I've generated a bunch of unit tests against diff-workflow with Claude
I've raised an issue to reorganise typings properly

I think we're good to launch

taylordowns2000 added this to Core Apr 2, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this to New Issues in Core Apr 2, 2026

doc-han marked this pull request as ready for review April 7, 2026 10:45

doc-han requested a review from josephjclark April 7, 2026 10:51

josephjclark requested changes Apr 7, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-project-automation bot moved this from New Issues to In review in Core Apr 7, 2026

doc-han requested a review from josephjclark April 13, 2026 08:12

josephjclark reviewed Apr 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

doc-han and others added 10 commits April 16, 2026 17:32

feat: diff init

8bd2c20

feat: use changed when body is fully changed

174fa00

chore: fix mutation problem

7373fa3

chore: update changelog

5b5d016

feat: resolve changes

88dd1f2

fix: unknown edge references

f3cc89f

feat: edge changes

6f63c01

chore: format

a1cdeef

tests: resolve failing tests

25a8d45

alias json-diff to diff-json

7fd8b89

josephjclark added 8 commits April 16, 2026 17:32

tweak layout

99d705a

random: tweak log levels

44b571b

add test suite and light refactor

aeaa647

update line diff

b1ff3a1

add test

7a5b40b

make diff printing a bit more flexible

f4a96e3

fix integration test

71c9c81

version

1972861

josephjclark force-pushed the diff-stuff branch from b1afe0d to 1972861 Compare April 16, 2026 16:32

better changelogs

a095e5a

josephjclark approved these changes Apr 16, 2026

View reviewed changes

josephjclark merged commit a3aa3d9 into main Apr 16, 2026
7 checks passed

github-project-automation bot moved this from In review to Done in Core Apr 16, 2026

josephjclark deleted the diff-stuff branch April 16, 2026 17:18

Conversation

doc-han commented Apr 2, 2026 • edited by josephjclark Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Short Description

AI Usage

Uh oh!

doc-han commented Apr 2, 2026

Uh oh!

doc-han commented Apr 2, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 7, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

doc-han commented Apr 13, 2026

Uh oh!

doc-han commented Apr 13, 2026

Uh oh!

doc-han commented Apr 13, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

josephjclark Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

josephjclark Apr 16, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

josephjclark commented Apr 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

doc-han commented Apr 2, 2026 •

edited by josephjclark

Loading