SLS 2.51.1 added package.artifact validation stops execution before plugin creates zip

[pworkpop]

The plugin never executes as part of package creation due to extra validation added to package.artifact: 2.51.1 (2021-07-08)
Packaging: Validate package.artifact paths (serverless/serverless#9721) (21c0fed) (Mariusz Nowak)

[michal1106]

Michael - any update relate to this?

Pavel Pavlov from CSOD wrote
As I have been working to add .NET 6 support to serverless template it is going to become a maintenance gridlock for us as Serverless V2 is in maintenance mode and hardly passes the Prisma scans anymore + configuration validation changes that were added break the multi-dotnet plugin.
Serverless V3 have removed the free-form CLI options support that we use to pass all options in favour of the --param option - this change would require updates to all serverless.yml files in all projects to use ${param:foo} instead of ${opt:foo} .

The list of breaking changes is quite long and likely the multi-dotnet plugin is also impacted. So the maintainers of this template will likely face some tough choices.

Funny he didn't notice there you are the owner :)
Any chance you can relate to his concerns or guide me through to extend the support of this plugin (not sure that I understood all the problems Pavel mentioned..)

Thanks in advnace,
Michal

[tsibelman]

Sorry I don't aware of this issue, if migration to version 3 is that problematic I can recommend to investigate other alternatives, this plugin was written 4 years ago then very little options existed for. Net serverless development, I recommend to check if it still relevant.

[pworkpop]

Plugin does not work since Serverless 2.51.1 introduced configuration validation that checks that artefact .zip file is present way before the plugin has a chance to produce this artefact. This remains true for Serverless V3 also. We resorted to a hack to touch the artefact .zip files before invoking sls package which is not the proper solution. If this plugin is not going to be supported anymore we definitely need to look at another solution, maybe even alternatives to Serverless.

[tsibelman]

@pworkpop I can still help with reviewing PR and publishing a new version to npm, but beyond that, I don't see myself investing additional time in maintaining this plugin.