fix(vscode): WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED source of truth (#9335) [hotfix/v5.961]

[lambrianmsft]

Cherry-pick of #9335 (1afcdc40) — make WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED the source of truth; remove redundant telemetry/context. 23 files, 0 graphify.

Hotfix-specific resolution (v5.961): this branch carries #9232 (restore codeful bundle version setting), a hotfix-only fix that writes codefulExtensionBundle* settings (bundle 1.165.50) into local.settings.json — settings that never existed on main. 9335 removes that write path.

To avoid silently reverting #9232, the 3 conflicting files (constants.ts, appSettings/localSettings.ts, CreateLogicAppWorkspace.ts) were resolved as 9335 canonical + preserved #9232 bundle-setting writes (rename workflowCodefulEnabled→workflowCodefulEnabledKey, null-safety, telemetry removal all applied; bundle writes kept). Diff vs 9335 canonical is exactly the #9232 re-adds — nothing else.

Commit Type

• feature - New functionality
• fix - Bug fix
• refactor - Code restructuring without behavior change
• perf - Performance improvement
• docs - Documentation update
• test - Test-related changes
• chore - Maintenance/tooling

Risk Level

• Low - Minor changes, limited scope
• Medium - Moderate changes, some user impact
• High - Major changes, significant user/system impact

What & Why

Updates 'isCodeful' checks to use the WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED app setting as source of truth rather than csproj content, which is a less reliable/standard indicator.

Impact of Change

• Users: May fix codeful project detection in some edge case scenarios
• Developers: Removes code for redundant telemetry and extension context
• System: N/A

Test Plan

• Unit tests added/updated
• E2E tests added/updated
• Manual testing completed
• Tested in:

Contributors

@andrew-eldridge

[github-actions]

🤖 AI PR Validation Report

PR Review Results

Thank you for your submission! Here's detailed feedback on your PR title and body compliance:

✅ PR Title

• Current: fix(vscode): WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED source of truth (#9335) [hotfix/v5.961]
• Issue: No blocking issue. The title is specific, names the area affected, and reads like a good changelog entry.
• Recommendation: Consider simplifying slightly if you want it more readable, e.g. fix(vscode): use WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED as the source of truth.

---

⚠️ Commit Type

• Properly selected (fix).
• Only one commit type is checked, which is correct.

---

⚠️ Risk Level

• Current selection: Low
• Assessment: The submitted risk level appears reasonable for this hotfix/cherry-pick, but the diff touches multiple areas across VS Code designer, React, and shared settings handling. I would advise Low only if this is tightly scoped to the hotfix branch as described; otherwise this could reasonably be considered Medium due to the breadth of files affected.
• Recommendation: If you want to be extra conservative, consider updating the PR body to Medium and add a brief note explaining the hotfix-only scope.

---

✅ What & Why

• Current: Updates 'isCodeful' checks to use the WORKFLOW_CODEFUL_ENABLED app setting as source of truth rather than csproj content, which is a less reliable/standard indicator.
• Issue: Clear and concise.
• Recommendation: No change required.

---

⚠️ Impact of Change

• The section is present and understandable, but it is fairly minimal relative to the size of the cherry-pick.
• Recommendation:
  • Users: Good as written; you may mention that codeful detection and workflow creation/publishing behavior may change for existing projects.
  • Developers: Consider noting that several call sites were updated to rely on hasCodefulWorkflowSetting and that redundant telemetry/context paths were removed.
  • System: If applicable, mention any impact to local settings generation and design-time startup behavior.

---

✅ Test Plan

• The PR body checks Unit tests added/updated and Manual testing completed, and the diff includes multiple updated unit tests.
• This satisfies the test plan requirement.

---

⚠️ Contributors

• @andrew-eldridge
• Good to have a contributor listed.
• Recommendation: No blocking issue. Add others only if they materially contributed.

---

⚠️ Screenshots/Videos

• Not provided.
• This is acceptable because the change does not appear to be a visual UI change.

---

Summary Table

Section	Status	Recommendation
Title	✅	Optional minor simplification only
Commit Type	⚠️	Correctly selected
Risk Level	⚠️	Low is acceptable; Medium may be more conservative
What & Why	✅	No change needed
Impact of Change	⚠️	Add a bit more detail if you want fuller context
Test Plan	✅	Satisfied by updated unit tests
Contributors	⚠️	Fine as-is
Screenshots/Videos	⚠️	Not required for this change

---

PR body and title pass overall. The only note is that the advised risk could be considered slightly higher than Low because the diff spans many files, but given the hotfix context the submitted Low risk is still defensible.

---

Last updated: Thu, 02 Jul 2026 03:07:42 GMT