Let function package.individually config override service artifact

[juanjoDiaz]

What did you implement:

Closes juanjoDiaz/serverless-plugin-warmup#25

The problem that this feature solves is that, if you set a service level artifact, functions marked as package: individually: true are not packaged individually as you would expect but use the service artifact instead.

This change simply allows you do to do:

package:
  artifact: my-app.zip

function:
  ...
  myIndividualFunc:
    ...
    package: 
      individually: true

So all the functions will use the my-app.zip artifact but myIndividualFunc will be packaged normally

How did you implement it:

It's a pretty trivial change. Simply check if the function is set to package individually and, if so, package it individually. :)

How can we verify it:

I've added a test that proves that the feature works and doesn't break existing functionality.
It's pretty trivial to verify with a small app:

service: test

provider:
  name: aws
  runtime: nodejs8.10

package:
  artifact: my-app.zip # This can be an empty zip

functions:
  normalFunc:
    handler: func/handler.func
    events:
      - http:
          path: func
          method: post
  individualFunc:
    handler: func/handler.func
    events:
      - http:
          path: func2
          method: post
    package:
       individually: true

running serverless package with the above config will create a zip for func/handler.func (the func folder needs to exist of course).
At the moment is doesn't and it just tries to use my-app.zip instead

Todos:

• Write tests
• Write documentation (No docs change needed. this change just make it work as the current docs make it seems like it would work)
• Fix linting errors
• Make sure code coverage hasn't dropped
• Provide verification config / commands / resources
• Enable "Allow edits from maintainers" for this PR
• Update the messages below

Is this ready for review?: YES
Is it a breaking change?: NO

[horike37]

@juanjoDiaz
Thank you for suggesting and implementing this solution 👍 I think this is a nice improvement.
Just reviewed and left one comment to the source code and. Check it please.

[horike37]

Use lodash like _.isEmpty(funcPackageConfig.individually) for consistancy of other places.

[juanjoDiaz]

I don't think that that is correct.
funcPackageConfig.individually is a boolean so _.isEmpty(...) will return true for all cases (true, false, undefined, null, etc.).
I searched the code base and couldn't find any example of using _.isEmpty in on boolean values.

Please correct me if I have misunderstood anything.

[horike37]

Make sense 👍 I was not correct.
Thank you for the response and investigating about _.isEmpty 🥇