-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.6k
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: add postject to fixtures #45298
test: add postject to fixtures #45298
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Rubber-stamp LGTM.
(It does feel a bit strange adding something to test/fixtures without also adding something somewhere else that uses it, but I'm not going to worry about that if no one else is. I assume the plan is to use it in subsequent PRs.) |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
}, | ||
"keywords": [], | ||
"author": "", | ||
"license": "ISC", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Optional nit: If this is code we're authoring and not copying from somewhere else, perhaps we should use the license that we use for the entire code base instead?
"license": "ISC", | |
"license": "MIT", |
This still has similar concerns to #45066 -- this is adding a 4mb binary WASM blob. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM with the suggested license change.
Do we need to update tools/license-builder.sh? We list things like gtest and ESLint that we include as part of the code base, so I think the answer is "yes"? |
Is this a blocker or merely a raised eyebrow? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm pretty sure we need to add postject to tools/license-builder.sh. Other than that, though, seems OK to me.
In order to address this concern
Could we intergrate similar to https://github.com/nodejs/node/tree/main/tools/lint-md where what gets added is any additional wrappers needed by the test as well as a package.json which as part of the make test would be installed ? I think https://github.com/nodejs/node/tree/main/tools/clang-format would be another example of a tool that we do something similar for. |
FWIW, if the concern is about the size of the thing being added, we already include eslint - https://github.com/nodejs/node/tree/main/tools/node_modules/eslint which is 21MB and postject is smaller than that. Regarding this being a blob, which is not something Linux distros like because it's unreadable - it's not something that should affect them because this will not get built as a part of the node binary. So I'm not sure how this can be a problem. |
2e38379
to
51a53c8
Compare
@Trott done, PTAL EDIT: Oh, nvm. Looks like Line 72 in 1287530
|
This should make it possible to test out the creation of Single Executable Applications on a PR without making outbound requests to download and run postject using npm. This is needed for nodejs#45038. Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/single-executable/blob/1840f3d9c5f4fa0d29aabd5618c4ff9745f7be87/meetings/2022-10-31.md?plain=1#L75-L76 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com>
51a53c8
to
32cd1fe
Compare
Turns out it was a connection issue from my end. I switched to a different network to run the script, so now the license changes should be okay. PTAL. |
This comment was marked as outdated.
This comment was marked as outdated.
Can someone PTAL? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
RSLGTM
Landed in 167d7a9 |
This should make it possible to test out the creation of Single Executable Applications on a PR without making outbound requests to download and run postject using npm. This is needed for #45038. Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/single-executable/blob/1840f3d9c5f4fa0d29aabd5618c4ff9745f7be87/meetings/2022-10-31.md?plain=1#L75-L76 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: #45298 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <hello@bnb.im>
This should make it possible to test out the creation of Single Executable Applications on a PR without making outbound requests to download and run postject using npm. This is needed for #45038. Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/single-executable/blob/1840f3d9c5f4fa0d29aabd5618c4ff9745f7be87/meetings/2022-10-31.md?plain=1#L75-L76 Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen <raisinten@gmail.com> PR-URL: #45298 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Tierney Cyren <hello@bnb.im>
This should make it possible to test out the creation of Single Executable Applications on a PR without making outbound requests to download and run postject using npm.
This is needed for #45038.
Refs: https://github.com/nodejs/single-executable/blob/1840f3d9c5f4fa0d29aabd5618c4ff9745f7be87/meetings/2022-10-31.md?plain=1#L75-L76
Signed-off-by: Darshan Sen raisinten@gmail.com
cc @nodejs/single-executable