| FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending | | Home |
| Tools: [Download Repo ZIP] [Original HTTPS Page] |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/8910/ (failed due to a typo) CI 2: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/8911/ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Sorting in the doc fixed. New CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/8912/ Some unstable results due to flaky tests. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
A few nits
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also I think this is a skip (exiting will close the server, and also you can flip the order, server.close then skip`
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be just 'Win32 does not support signals.'
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not true. I'll open an issue to fix this test.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Are any actions from me required in this case for now?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not for this PR.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ref: #14039
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Conflict resolved, comments addressed. CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/8925/ Some results are unstable with flaky tests. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
For my sanity, I'd say in such huge PRs address the comments in a new commit (rebasing aside). Now I need to trust you or go over everything again 🤷♂️ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
Sorry. In addition to two files mentioned in your comments, the only parallel/test-crypto-pbkdf2.js was touched due to 48660fb Duly noted. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@nodejs/collaborators, this PR changes a heavily used method from common library (and adds an associated one), so I mention all collaborators to be sure the news is spread and no objections exist. (Refs once more: #14016) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Also add common.printSkipMessage() for partial skips. Fixes: #14016
|
Conflict resolved in (due to cc1a47d): test/parallel/test-tls-alert.js test/parallel/test-tls-alert-handling.js test/parallel/test-tls-client-verify.js test/parallel/test-tls-npn-server-client.js test/parallel/test-tls-server-verify.js test/parallel/test-tls-sni-option.js test/parallel/test-tls-sni-server-client.js test/parallel/test-tls-startcom-wosign-whitelist.js |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
I'm +0 on those changes, the benefit is marginal IMO and it adds churn but the end code is slightly cleaner. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@vsemozhetbyt would you be able to backport this to v6.x? I totally missed this coming through or would have likely blocked on such a large churn going against the repo. With 330 files changed in this single commit we have a fairly huge delta now when backporting any future test refactors / changes. @Trott has been working on similar backports but submitted each subsystem or group of specific tests per PR, which makes it much easier to backport. In future if we are going to do such large churn can you please coordinate with @nodejs/lts and potentially get a backport ready in advance? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@MylesBorins I shall try to backport and coordinate with @nodejs/lts for such PRs if there are any (I am personally a bit burdened already with my gloomy reputation as "king of churn"). |
Sorry, something went wrong.
|
@MylesBorins |
Sorry, something went wrong.
| Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL |
Checklist
Affected core subsystem(s)
test, doc
Make common.skip() exit. Also add common.printSkipMessage() for partial skips. Fixes: test: a small common.skip() improvement proposal #14016
Don't make needless things before skip
PR is big but seems easy to skim. Maybe it would be more convenient to review it commit by commit.