feat(medusa): Expose an activeManager_ getter in TransactionBaseService

[adrien2p]

No description provided.

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 3761221

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 2 packages

Name	Type
@medusajs/medusa	Patch
@medusajs/inventory	Patch

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[carlos-r-l-rodrigues]

LGTM. Nice cleanup

[olivermrbl]

Such a nice clean up! @srindom can I get you to sign off on this too :)

[olivermrbl]

@adrien2p Should be updated to use the new Typeorm repository API

[adrien2p]

@adrien2p Should be updated to use the new Typeorm repository API

@olivermrbl as soon as develop will be merged into it and I resolve the conflict it will use the new repo 💪

[olivermrbl]

as soon as develop will be merged into it

Yep sorry, that was what I meant 😅

[srindom]

Super nice! The only thing that I can think of as a potential risk with this is if people have done:

// my-custom-service.ts

import { TransactionBaseService } from "@medusajs/medusa"

class MyService extends TransactionBaseService {
 ...
}

TS would complain after an update right? So this is a breaking change that should be highlighted.

[adrien2p]

Super nice! The only thing that I can think of as a potential risk with this is if people have done:

// my-custom-service.ts

import { TransactionBaseService } from "@medusajs/medusa"

class MyService extends TransactionBaseService {
 ...
}

TS would complain after an update right? So this is a breaking change that should be highlighted.

I am not sure what would TS complain about? everything that was done previously can still live, we just add a new helper getter

[srindom]

Was unsure if the change from protected abstract -> protected would make the compiler complain, but if it doesn't then all good 💪

[adrien2p]

Was unsure if the change from protected abstract -> protected would make the compiler complain, but if it doesn't then all good 💪

@srindom it does not complain because now it is just optional to define it on the child class, but if it is present it is not a problem since protected members are accessible from the child