Revert "watch: fix watch args not being properly filtered" - #58190
Closed
joyeecheung wants to merge 2 commits into
Closed
Revert "watch: fix watch args not being properly filtered"#58190joyeecheung wants to merge 2 commits into
joyeecheung wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor
|
Fast-track has been requested by @joyeecheung. Please 👍 to approve. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator
Sorry, something went wrong.
marco-ippolito
approved these changes
May 6, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ Additional details and impacted files @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #58190 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 90.14% 90.13% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 630 630
Lines 186780 186780
Branches 36654 36654
==========================================
- Hits 168381 168347 -34
- Misses 11197 11208 +11
- Partials 7202 7225 +23 see 34 files with indirect coverage changes 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
BridgeAR
approved these changes
May 6, 2025
geeksilva97
approved these changes
May 6, 2025
lpinca
approved these changes
May 6, 2025
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator
Sorry, something went wrong.
dario-piotrowicz
approved these changes
May 6, 2025
dario-piotrowicz
left a comment
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sorry for whatever reason I completely missed the flakiness when merging the PR (likely because as you mentioned the tests were already flagged as flaky so I didn't see anything wrong with them in CI)
(I didn't see any flakiness locally 🤔)
Sorry for the trouble 🙇
Sorry, something went wrong.
nodejs-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2025
This reverts commit 6102159. PR-URL: #58190 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Dario Piotrowicz <dario.piotrowicz@gmail.com>
nodejs-github-bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 6, 2025
This reverts commit 4acb854. PR-URL: #58190 Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <marcoippolito54@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <ruben@bridgewater.de> Reviewed-By: Edy Silva <edigleyssonsilva@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Dario Piotrowicz <dario.piotrowicz@gmail.com>
9 tasks
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Reviewers
8 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#57936 landed despite failing the test cases it added to test-watch-mode.mjs https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/66587/ - likely because the the test file has already been being marked as flaky so failures in it were ignored. This was one of the reason why we should refrain from appending test cases to existing files as suggested in https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/doc/contributing/writing-tests.md - maybe we should make that mandatory for any test files that are already marked as flaky.
Reverting this because this has been making the Jenkins very orange and has been failing several GitHub actions (not sure why but they are not ignoring flakes), and should not have landed in the first place when it already failed the tests it added.