fix(content-tree): apply filtered children during restructure#8011
Merged
alexander-akait merged 1 commit intoMar 14, 2026
Merged
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
alexander-akait
approved these changes
Mar 14, 2026
Member
Author
|
thanks! |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
The content tree restructuring pipeline called item.children.filter(filter) but discarded the returned array and this made filtering a no-op and it could silently break future filter rules in navigation/content generation.
So this PR assigns the filtered result back to item.children before sorting, so the pipeline behavior matches its contract.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Bug fix
Did you add tests for your changes?
Yes
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No
If relevant, what needs to be documented once your changes are merged or what have you already documented?
No additional docs required.
Use of AI
Yes, I used an Ai collaborator to help review my initial logic and to assist in debugging the Jest ESM environment configuration but still, the identification of the no-op filter bug and the final implementation of the unit tests were manually verified and tested locally to ensure the pipeline correctness.