-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9.4k
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
deps(angular): update minor version of angular fixture #11043
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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.
can we use this as motivation to move
aggressive-promise-polyfill.js
to the rootthird-party/
where it probably should be? :)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 looked into it, but
lighthouse/lighthouse-cli/test/fixtures/static-server.js
Line 67 in 1330133
makes that pretty challenging. ideas?
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.
we could do another of these
lighthouse/lighthouse-cli/test/fixtures/static-server.js
Lines 161 to 164 in 1330133
🤮
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.
plz no this breaks smoke rider
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.
Can we talk solutions, then? How did smokerider work when we used to serve it out of
node_modules/
?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.
bump
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.
we skip urls that use external resources, so I guess we skipped that one too when it served a file from
node_modules
. search forusesExternalResources
in google3 smokerider.can we check it into
fixtures/third_party
instead, so there is no serving rewiring needed?EDIT: ah, I see that is how it is now but brendan is suggesting moving to root. so my take is to keep it where it is. but I'd prefer
fixtures/third_party
as a central place for all possible 3p smoke assetsThere 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.
well, those are equally wrong places to put third-party code, so I'm equally fine with them :P
Honestly we should probably delete this file and replace it with a considerably simpler promise stomper (we have a lot more confidence in our isolated context and cached globals than we did when we added this test), but adding it to the unit test is probably going to make it so that never happens :)
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.
devtools frontend does this (
/third_party
and/front_end/third_party
), so it's not without prior artThere 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.
resolution: we handwrite a promisepolyfill for that test.
we get rid of this big one.
maybe use some other minified js for this estimator test.
@paulirish to do