• Create a Draft Pull Request if your PR is not ready for review. Mark the PR as Ready for Review when you're ready for a Cypress team member to review the PR.

• I also have an update to the README > command section planned, once this validation PR is reviewed and merged. (see PR test: rework custom test command and example #1447)

🎉 This PR is included in version 6.9.0 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

@jennifer-shehane

This is a good idea. I wonder if an error state is desirable over a warning, but having this warning is a good first step to verify issues anyway.

The validation does not stop the workflow running and it can still be successful running the command specified in the command parameter, even if other parameters are specified and are ignored. Warning seemed like the best choice in this case.

A error message (rather than a warning) would fit better together with failing the workflow. That however would be a breaking change and I don't think it is necessary or desirable to fail such a workflow at this time.

We can revisit after seeing if there is any specific feedback on the change. The main goal was to inform workflow authors that their parameter(s) would be ignored in this situation, so that they have the information to review their parameters and make corrections.

Moving from warning to failing at a later time would be like first deprecating a function then removing it at a later time. The timeline for a transition like this should be at least a few months.