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

feat(npm): Allow to configure checkPackageName for npm target #504

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 17, 2023

Conversation

mydea
Copy link
Member

@mydea mydea commented Nov 16, 2023

This updates the npm target with the following new behavior:

  • If the new config for the npm target checkPackageName is defined, we check the current version of this package on npm
  • If this version is newer than the to-be-published version, we tag it as "old" instead of "latest".

This supersedes #502.

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Comment on lines +352 to +353
logger.warn('Adding tag "old" to not make it "latest" in registry.');
return 'old';
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

theoretically (not saying this should happen now), we could assign a <major>.x tag here if we decide we want to go this route for multi-major version support.

src/targets/npm.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Lukas Stracke <lukas.stracke@sentry.io>
src/targets/__tests__/npm.test.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
const logger = {
warn: jest.fn(),
} as any;
const actual = await getPublishTag(
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

hmmm is this hitting actual public npm during test? we probably want to avoid that if possible since it makes these tests dependent on external state

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, this hits npm. I tried to write the test in a way that it works with whatever version we get back. But yes, if NPM would be down this would fail. Any idea how else to test this? 🤔 if we don't want to hit NPM the test also gets less realistic. The only thing I can think of is to mock spawnProcess and have it return a static version?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would record some example invocations of spawnProcess and patch them in there

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@asottile-sentry I've updated the test to use a mocked process there instead!

Copy link
Member

@asottile-sentry asottile-sentry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@mydea mydea merged commit c913d5a into master Nov 17, 2023
9 checks passed
@mydea mydea deleted the fn/npm-latest-branch branch November 17, 2023 08:06
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