Duplicate "Setting artifact for function" logs (possible redundant calls to setArtifactPath?)

[NoxHarmonium]

Duplicate "Setting artifact for function" logs (possible redundant calls to setArtifactPath?)

Description

I guess this might be a minor bug but I did spend a fair chunk of time debugging it so I think it is worth raising. If the issue is valid I'll be happy to raise a PR to get a fix in.

What went wrong?

Every time I package or deploy with the --verbose switch I get duplicate "Setting artifact for function" messages.

For example with individual packaging enabled and a function called "myFunction"

yarn sls package --stage sandbox --verbose

...
[Webpack] Copying existing artifacts
Setting artifact for function 'myFunction' to '.serverless/myFunction.zip'
Setting artifact for function 'myFunction2' to '.serverless/myFunction2.zip'
Setting artifact for function 'myFunction' to '.serverless/myFunction.zip'
Setting artifact for function 'myFunction2' to '.serverless/myFunction2.zip'
...

What did you expect should have happened?

Not to have duplicate logs for each function

What was the config you used?

import type { AWS } from '@serverless/typescript';
import myFunction from '@functions/myFunction';
import myFunction2 from '@functions/myFunction2';

const serverlessConfiguration: AWS = {
  service: 'example-project',
  frameworkVersion: '3',
  plugins: ['serverless-webpack'],
  provider: {
    name: 'aws',
    region: 'ap-southeast-2',
    runtime: 'nodejs14.x',
    stage: '${opt:stage}',
    apiGateway: {
      minimumCompressionSize: 1024,
      shouldStartNameWithService: true,
      apiKeys: ['foo-bar'],
    },
    environment: {
      AWS_NODEJS_CONNECTION_REUSE_ENABLED: '1',
      NODE_OPTIONS: '--enable-source-maps --stack-trace-limit=1000',
    },
  },
  // import the function via paths
  functions: {
    myFunction,
    myFunction2,
  },
  package: { individually: true },
  resources: {
    Resources: {},
  },
  custom: {
    webpack: {
      packager: 'yarn',
      includeModules: {
        forceExclude: ['some-lib'],
      },
    },
  },
};

module.exports = serverlessConfiguration;

What stacktrace or error message from your provider did you see?

No explicit stack trace or error message

Suggested Fix

I could be wrong but it looks like there might be some duplicate code in lib/packageModules.js

First there is a loop to call setArtifactPath for each function.

serverless-webpack/lib/packageModules.js

Line 236 in 76988d5

_.forEach(functionNames, funcName => {

it already has logic to set the correct artefact path depending on whether individual packaging is enabled or not

serverless-webpack/lib/packageModules.js

Line 239 in 76988d5

const archiveName = isIndividualPackaging.call(this) ? funcName : this.serverless.service.getServiceObject().name;

Then further down, if individual packaging is enabled, setArtifactPath is called again with the same args which I think is redundant

serverless-webpack/lib/packageModules.js

Line 247 in 76988d5

_.forEach(functionNames, funcName => {

If I understand correctlty, I think the following patch might do the trick, without introducing any side effects. It is very rough, and I haven't tested it. If you think my analysis is correct I'll go over it again and make sure tests pass etc.

See what you think:

---
 lib/packageModules.js | 23 +++++++----------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/packageModules.js b/lib/packageModules.js
index fce5493..e794b29 100644
--- a/lib/packageModules.js
+++ b/lib/packageModules.js
@@ -224,42 +224,33 @@ module.exports = {
     // only function passed with `-f` flag should be processed.
     const functionNames = this.options.function ? [this.options.function] : getAllNodeFunctions.call(this);
 
+    const serviceName = this.serverless.service.getServiceObject().name;
+
     // Copy artifacts to package location
     if (isIndividualPackaging.call(this)) {
       _.forEach(functionNames, funcName => copyArtifactByName.call(this, funcName));
     } else {
       // Copy service packaged artifact
-      const serviceName = this.serverless.service.getServiceObject().name;
       copyArtifactByName.call(this, serviceName);
     }
 
     _.forEach(functionNames, funcName => {
       const func = this.serverless.service.getFunction(funcName);
 
-      const archiveName = isIndividualPackaging.call(this) ? funcName : this.serverless.service.getServiceObject().name;
+      const archiveName = isIndividualPackaging.call(this) ? funcName : serviceName;
 
       const { serverlessArtifact } = getArtifactLocations.call(this, archiveName);
       setArtifactPath.call(this, funcName, func, serverlessArtifact);
     });
 
     // Set artifact locations
-    if (isIndividualPackaging.call(this)) {
-      _.forEach(functionNames, funcName => {
-        const func = this.serverless.service.getFunction(funcName);
-
-        const archiveName = funcName;
-
-        const { serverlessArtifact } = getArtifactLocations.call(this, archiveName);
-        setArtifactPath.call(this, funcName, func, serverlessArtifact);
-      });
-    } else {
-      const archiveName = this.serverless.service.getServiceObject().name;
+    if (!isIndividualPackaging.call(this) && 
+        _.get(this.serverless, 'service.provider.name') === 'google') {
+      const archiveName = serviceName;
 
       const { serverlessArtifact } = getArtifactLocations.call(this, archiveName);
 
-      if (_.get(this.serverless, 'service.provider.name') === 'google') {
-        setServiceArtifactPath.call(this, serverlessArtifact);
-      }
+      setServiceArtifactPath.call(this, serverlessArtifact);
     }
 
     return BbPromise.resolve();
-- 

Additional Data

• Serverless-Webpack Version you're using:
  5.7.1
• Webpack version you're using:
  5.73.0
• Serverless Framework Version you're using:
  Framework Core: 3.7.1 (local)
  Plugin: 6.1.5
  SDK: 4.3.2
• Operating System:
  MacOS Monterey 12.6

Also

Thanks for the great plugin!

[j0k3r]

That's seems to be a valid fix, you can open a PR.
Thanks for the clear explanation!

[NoxHarmonium]

No worries! I should have a PR up within the next few days