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

test_runner: add __proto__ null #48663

Merged

Conversation

rluvaton
Copy link
Member

@rluvaton rluvaton commented Jul 5, 2023

extracted from:

TODO:

  • Run CITGM
  • mark as a major change

reference: #48646 (comment)

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/test_runner

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run. labels Jul 5, 2023
@anonrig anonrig added the needs-benchmark-ci PR that need a benchmark CI run. label Jul 6, 2023
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

aduh95 commented Jul 9, 2023

anonrig added the needs-benchmark-ci PR that need a benchmark CI run.

@anonrig we don't have benchmarks for the test runner – and I don't think we need it for this PR.

TODO:

  • Run CITGM
  • mark as a major change

IMHO that would be overkill for this PR:

  • I don't think we need it for node:test code: it's been designed to minimize the risk of user code influencing its results, so the changes in this PR should not be observable for users – and if they are, we would consider it a bug, so this would still be a patch rather than a breaking change.
  • I don't think we need it for code related to node --test, because no user code would be run in the process.
  • Also, because this code is relatively new, I think it's fair to assume no one is relying on mutating %Object.prototype% anyway.

That being said, if others think differently, I'm OK with taking the more prudent path.

Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Any chance you could add the lint rule along with this PR, but make it apply only to lib/internal/test_runner?

@benjamingr benjamingr added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 9, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 9, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

Any chance you could add the lint rule along with this PR, but make it apply only to lib/internal/test_runner?

Sure

@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

Any chance you could add the lint rule along with this PR, but make it apply only to lib/internal/test_runner?

see #48646 (comment)

@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

@aduh95 I've added the eslint rule...

.eslintrc.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

aduh95 commented Jul 21, 2023

There are a few tests that need fixing. Also can you please rebase on top of main? Merge commits tend to break our tooling.

@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

@aduh95 done

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

aduh95 commented Jul 24, 2023

@rluvaton thanks, but it seems the merge commit is still there, and there are a few unrelated commits that were added. Did you maybe rebase main on top of your branch, instead of rebasing your branch on top of main? Let me know if you'd prefer I take care of it.

@rluvaton rluvaton force-pushed the add-proto-null-to-test-runner branch from 1862cb6 to 32b3373 Compare July 24, 2023 08:40
@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

thanks, but it seems the merge commit is still there, and there are a few unrelated commits that were added. Did you maybe rebase main on top of your branch, instead of rebasing your branch on top of main? Let me know if you'd prefer I take care of it.

it would be great, I'm having problem for some reason

@aduh95 aduh95 added author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. labels Jul 24, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 24, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@aduh95 aduh95 added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 28, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 28, 2023
@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

@aduh95 done and fixed the original issue as well

@atlowChemi atlowChemi added the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 28, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the request-ci Add this label to start a Jenkins CI on a PR. label Jul 28, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@rluvaton
Copy link
Member Author

failed again on a different unreleated thing...

@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

@aduh95 aduh95 added the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Jul 29, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot removed the commit-queue Add this label to land a pull request using GitHub Actions. label Jul 29, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot merged commit ee391f3 into nodejs:main Jul 29, 2023
@nodejs-github-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

Landed in ee391f3

pluris pushed a commit to pluris/node that referenced this pull request Aug 6, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
pluris pushed a commit to pluris/node that referenced this pull request Aug 7, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Ceres6 pushed a commit to Ceres6/node that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Ceres6 pushed a commit to Ceres6/node that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
UlisesGascon pushed a commit to UlisesGascon/node that referenced this pull request Aug 14, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: #48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
@UlisesGascon UlisesGascon mentioned this pull request Aug 15, 2023
RafaelGSS pushed a commit to RafaelGSS/node that referenced this pull request Aug 15, 2023
PR-URL: nodejs#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
RafaelGSS pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 17, 2023
PR-URL: #48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 27, 2023
PR-URL: #48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
sercher added a commit to sercher/graaljs that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2024
PR-URL: nodejs/node#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
sercher added a commit to sercher/graaljs that referenced this pull request Apr 25, 2024
PR-URL: nodejs/node#48663
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <duhamelantoine1995@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Chemi Atlow <chemi@atlow.co.il>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. needs-benchmark-ci PR that need a benchmark CI run. needs-ci PRs that need a full CI run.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants