You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
First of all, thank you for the great library! It really simplifies my workflows when building multiple libs from the same monorepo!
Description
When using nested component structures in a Polylith project, the poly check command fails to locate components even though the build process works correctly.
Everything builds and works as expected, except poly check command, which throws 🤔 Cannot locate aws in cli
I believe the root cause of the behaviour is here:
The code checks for p.name which is s3 and p.parent.name is not a namespace, but a namespace/aws. Thus, the missing brick.
I'm not sure whether described behavior is expected, but it's really handy to organise things this way, so that you can include only a specific brick you're using, not the entire folder.
My expectation was it should work with poly check as well, since it works perfectly during the build and the resulting .whl executes with no issues at all.
I think this is expected behavior because the added things should be on brick-level and Polylith considers aws as one brick. I would suggest that you either add the entire aws brick, or separate the sub-namespaces s3 and glue into their own bricks. If you want them visually grouped in the folder structure, you could name the bricks with a prefix, such as aws_s3.
Activity
DavidVujic commentedon Jan 27, 2026
Hi @Paulskit,
I'm happy to hear that you like Polylith!
I think this is expected behavior because the added things should be on brick-level and Polylith considers
awsas one brick. I would suggest that you either add the entireawsbrick, or separate the sub-namespacess3andglueinto their own bricks. If you want them visually grouped in the folder structure, you could name the bricks with a prefix, such asaws_s3.DavidVujic commentedon Jan 31, 2026
(moving this to the Q&A discussions section)