Extensions must not import anything neither from core nor planning. Instead either use superdesk api or planning api via bridge.

I'm wondering whether this would appear in authoring-angular as well?

if you're asking wether there would be a conflict thus two of the same actions rendering because of being registered in two places yes. I plan to address this in another PR, together with the external-app thingy, as this is something that affects all actions so we need a generic solution.

I think doing a simple collision detection mechanism would suffice for now. If we have an action with the same id coming from extensions as well, we don't push it to the e.g. allActions array. We skip that one, while prioritising existing ones. In react we don't show the angular registered ones, so this should be enough to ignore the react side for now. Later when we remove the angular implementation we will remove the filtering

Extensions API have access to authoringReactViewEnabled variable. What about using it to conditionally push the action?

Alternativelly, what about if we dropped the old action and kept only the new one? I did that with planning details widget - dropped the angular version of a widget - and the react one works in both - angular and react based authoring.

better keep relative path. There are lots of index files

If you mean the absolute it would be something like superdesk-planning/index.ts

If relative, then this is it, and coincidentally index.ts really is the path & file name, relative to the project.

I meant relative to the project. You get it by right clicking open file tab and choosing "copy relative path"

link relative path