Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

lookup: skip graceful-fs on >=11 #655

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 15, 2018
Merged

Conversation

targos
Copy link
Member

@targos targos commented Dec 15, 2018

Some tests fail because of GC-related changes.

@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Dec 15, 2018

Codecov Report

Merging #655 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #655   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   94.41%   94.41%           
=======================================
  Files          26       26           
  Lines         823      823           
=======================================
  Hits          777      777           
  Misses         46       46

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 4a3d2dc...4650873. Read the comment docs.

@targos targos changed the title lookup: skip graceful-fs on >11 lookup: skip graceful-fs on >=11 Dec 15, 2018
Some tests fail because of GC-related changes.
@mcollina
Copy link
Member

Do you remember what was decided during the latest breakage of graceful-fs?

We might need to open an issue there and get this fixed.

cc @addaleax.

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Dec 15, 2018

Feel free to open an issue there, I agree it should be done. In the mean time, I want to get CITGM runs green again. Otherwise it's too difficult to determine if a change in core introduces new breakages.

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

I tend to disagree with the overall approach. Skipping modules that fails provides a false sense of security “but citgm was green!”
On the other end not skipping them make the tool less reliable.

I think we should open an issue “Ecosystem modules that will break on Node 12.0.0” in core, and append these to the list. So that we keep track of what has been skipped and must be fixed.

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Dec 15, 2018

I think we should open an issue “Ecosystem modules that will break on Node 12.0.0” in core, and append these to the list. So that we keep track of what has been skipped and must be fixed.

SGTM

@addaleax
Copy link
Member

@mcollina This is a different kind of breakage than the issues we were having with them hooking into our internals – see isaacs/node-graceful-fs#137 for the root cause here

@targos
Copy link
Member Author

targos commented Dec 15, 2018

@mcollina I opened nodejs/node#25060. LGTY?

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@mcollina
Copy link
Member

lol nodejs/node#25059 ;).

@targos targos merged commit e27cc95 into nodejs:master Dec 15, 2018
@targos targos deleted the skip-graceful-fs branch December 15, 2018 13:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants