New command: spo file archive. Closes #7175#7192
New command: spo file archive. Closes #7175#7192Saurabh7019 wants to merge 3 commits intopnp:mainfrom
Conversation
|
Awesome work @Saurabh7019! We'll try to check it ASAP. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR adds a new SharePoint Online command (m365 spo file archive) to archive a file (by server-relative URL or UniqueId), including documentation, command constant wiring, Dev Proxy API spec updates, and a full unit test suite.
Changes:
- Added
spo file archivecommand implementation with Zod-based option parsing and confirmation prompt support. - Added Mocha tests covering validation, confirmation flow, success paths (by URL / by ID), and error handling.
- Updated docs navigation + new command reference page, and extended the Dev Proxy SharePoint API spec.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 6 out of 6 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
src/m365/spo/commands/file/file-archive.ts |
Implements the new spo file archive command and SharePoint REST interactions to resolve list/item and call Archive. |
src/m365/spo/commands/file/file-archive.spec.ts |
Adds unit tests for option validation, prompting behavior, success cases, and error handling. |
src/m365/spo/commands.ts |
Registers the command name constant FILE_ARCHIVE. |
docs/src/config/sidebars.ts |
Adds the command doc to the SPO “file” commands sidebar. |
docs/docs/cmd/spo/file/file-archive.mdx |
Adds end-user documentation for the new command, including examples and sample output. |
.devproxy/api-specs/sharepoint.yaml |
Adds Dev Proxy spec entries for Archive and GetFileByServerRelativePath. |
milanholemans
left a comment
milanholemans
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice command! I did a first review based on sight and found some things we should take a look at.
milanholemans
left a comment
milanholemans
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Command looks almost good to go! I think we need to adjust a few minor things to get this merged.
If you are able to process the feedback by next weekend, I'm sure we can get the command in the April release.
|
|
||
| ## Examples | ||
|
|
||
| Archive a file without prompting for confirmation |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Archive a file without prompting for confirmation | |
| Archive a file by id without prompting for confirmation |
| const { webUrl, url, id, force, verbose } = args.options; | ||
|
|
||
| if (!force) { | ||
| const result = await cli.promptForConfirmation({ message: `Are you sure you want to archive the file ${url || id} at site ${webUrl}?` }); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's reuse some warnings from the GUI about the 7 days period and 24h reactivation time. I wouldn't mention the site URL here because the warning will get too long.
| responseType: 'json' | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| const archiveUrl = `${webUrl}/_api/Lists(guid'${fileInfo.ListId}')/items(${fileInfo.ListItemAllFields.Id})/Archive`; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's assign the URL directly to the request body.
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it('prompts before archiving file when confirmation argument not passed', async () => { | ||
| await command.action(logger, { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's add some simple stubs to this test. In case we accidentally remove the prompt mechanism, this test will currently timeout because API requests are not stubbed.
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| it('aborts archiving file when prompt not confirmed', async () => { | ||
| const postStub = sinon.stub(request, 'post').resolves(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't we also stub the get request?
| } | ||
| else if (url) { | ||
| const serverRelativePath = urlUtil.getServerRelativePath(webUrl, url); | ||
| requestUrl += `/GetFileByServerRelativePath(DecodedUrl='${serverRelativePath}')`; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's encode this query parameter.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The tests so far are looking quite good. However, I would love to see two additional tests:
- Test to ensure that the logger is not used (ensure the command outputs no result)
- Test that archives a file using a site-relative URL, e.g.:
/MarketingDocs/Icons/ContosoIcon.svg)
Closes #7175