Skip to content

Conversation

@graingert
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@graingert graingert force-pushed the fix-failing-tests-on-master branch from b3006f0 to 5cf14d9 Compare September 29, 2017 14:43
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Sep 29, 2017

Codecov Report

Merging #15 into master will decrease coverage by 0.04%.
The diff coverage is 100%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #15      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.52%   97.47%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files          18       18              
  Lines         363      357       -6     
==========================================
- Hits          354      348       -6     
  Misses          9        9
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
tests/lib/rules/no-instanceof-wrapper.js 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
lib/rules/no-instanceof-wrapper.js 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
lib/rules/no-this-in-static.js 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
lib/rules/no-use-ignored-vars.js 100% <ø> (ø) ⬆️
tests/lib/rules/no-literal-call.js 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
tests/lib/rules/no-useless-rest-spread.js 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
lib/rules/block-scoped-var.js 98.75% <100%> (-0.09%) ⬇️
tests/lib/rules/no-this-in-static.js 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
tests/lib/rules/prefer-for-of.js 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
tests/lib/rules/no-use-ignored-vars.js 100% <100%> (ø) ⬆️
... and 3 more

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 b87787e...28156ba. Read the comment docs.

@graingert graingert force-pushed the fix-failing-tests-on-master branch from 5cf14d9 to 1d58ab5 Compare September 29, 2017 14:50
@graingert graingert changed the title noop fix-failing-tests-on-master Sep 29, 2017
@graingert graingert changed the title fix-failing-tests-on-master fix failing tests on master Sep 29, 2017
@graingert
Copy link
Contributor Author

hey, @mysticatea your tests are failing on master!

Copy link
Owner

@mysticatea mysticatea left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for contributing.

Is my understanding correct that this PR includes the following things:

  • Fixing some tests.
  • Updating dependencies.
  • Addin Node 8 to CI.

Plus, I'd not like to include package-lock.json. Could you remove it?

.travis.yml Outdated
after_success:
- npm run codecov
- "8"
before_install: npm install -g npm@latest
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is npm update needed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep, so that npm@5 or more is installed (only the latest major version is supported)

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The requirements of this package include Node.js ^4.0.0 1. I think this implies this package expects to work with the npm that Node.js 4.0.0 bundles. If the upgrade of npm is needed, I cannot merge this PR.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I guess the other option is yarn. Without a lock file of some sort a problem like this will reoccur

Copy link
Owner

@mysticatea mysticatea Oct 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The root cause of the problem is that tests included invalid syntax. The failing is natural. I think I should run CI regularly and fix problems.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You can configure that with Travis Cron beta

Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you! I will configure it later.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The other option is for a master only set of tests that delete the package lock before install. This way PRs are not effected but you still get to know about bugs

@@ -0,0 +1,4625 @@
{
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could you add .npmrc with package-lock=false and remove this package-lock.json?
See also: vuejs/eslint-plugin-vue#128

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Package lock is included to prevent master from failing without any changes

Copy link
Owner

@mysticatea mysticatea Oct 2, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I want not to merge package-lock.json into this repo because it damages the value of CI builds, the file disallows CI builds running tests with dependencies that users install actually.

{code: "import a from \"a\"; var a;", parserOptions: {sourceType: "module"}, errors: [{type: "Identifier", message: "\"a\" is already defined."}]},
{code: "import a from \"a\"; import a from \"b/a\";", parserOptions: {sourceType: "module"}, errors: [{type: "Identifier", message: "\"a\" is already defined."}]},
{code: "{ var a; { var a; } }", errors: [{type: "Identifier", message: "\"a\" is already defined in the upper scope."}]},
{code: "import a from \"a\"; { var a; }", parserOptions: {sourceType: "module"}, errors: [{type: "Identifier", message: "\"a\" is already defined in the upper scope."}]},
Copy link
Owner

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a question, do 3 test cases which include import declarations throw syntax error currently?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes. You can't shadow an import at all in modern babel

@graingert graingert force-pushed the fix-failing-tests-on-master branch from d350dd3 to 768155b Compare October 2, 2017 08:59
@graingert
Copy link
Contributor Author

Plus, I'd not like to include package-lock.json. Could you remove it?

Alright, but it means that PRs will fail unnecessarily

@graingert
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mysticatea looks like node 4 needs the new version of npm.

@mysticatea
Copy link
Owner

Could you remove cache of node_modules? I suspect that it's the cause of the problem.

@graingert graingert force-pushed the fix-failing-tests-on-master branch from 768155b to 28156ba Compare October 2, 2017 09:25
@graingert
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mysticatea removed cache.

@graingert
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mysticatea oh yeah, that did it.

Copy link
Owner

@mysticatea mysticatea left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you very much!

@mysticatea mysticatea merged commit f447c9b into mysticatea:master Oct 2, 2017
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.

3 participants