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

Revert "build: run lint before tests" #5602

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

Trott
Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott commented Mar 8, 2016

  • Does make -j8 test (UNIX) or vcbuild test nosign (Windows) pass with
    this change (including linting)?
  • Is the commit message formatted according to [CONTRIBUTING.md][0]?
  • If this change fixes a bug (or a performance problem), is a regression
    test (or a benchmark) included?
  • Is a documentation update included (if this change modifies
    existing APIs, or introduces new ones)?

The reverted commit seems to have been mildly controversial. Revert it for now. If the change or something similar is highly desirable, a wider conversation can happen.

/cc @bnoordhuis @jbergstroem @evanlucas @Fishrock123 @jasnell @thealphanerd

This reverts commit d9f7a59.

Changes here probably need wider discussion so revert the change until
that can happen.
@Trott Trott added build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI. lts-watch-v4.x labels Mar 8, 2016
@Fishrock123
Copy link
Contributor

Hmmm, this kinda goes back to my problem, though that flaky tests was fixed for me so I guess it's ok.

@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

2 similar comments
@targos
Copy link
Member

targos commented Mar 8, 2016

LGTM

@cjihrig
Copy link
Contributor

cjihrig commented Mar 8, 2016

LGTM

@bnoordhuis
Copy link
Member

LETM! (E=Excellent)

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Mar 8, 2016

LGTM

jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 8, 2016
This reverts commit d9f7a59.

Changes here probably need wider discussion so revert the change until
that can happen.

PR-URL: #5602
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Mar 8, 2016

Landed in 89d5379

@jasnell jasnell closed this Mar 8, 2016
@Trott
Copy link
Member Author

Trott commented Mar 8, 2016

@Fishrock123 wrote:

Hmmm, this kinda goes back to my problem, though that flaky tests was fixed for me so I guess it's ok.

I'll open a separate issue to list out options along with pros and cons so we can see if anything will work well enough to get consensus.

evanlucas pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 14, 2016
This reverts commit d9f7a59.

Changes here probably need wider discussion so revert the change until
that can happen.

PR-URL: #5602
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
@evanlucas evanlucas mentioned this pull request Mar 14, 2016
rvagg pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 16, 2016
This reverts commit d9f7a59.

Changes here probably need wider discussion so revert the change until
that can happen.

PR-URL: #5602
Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <mic.besace@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
@MylesBorins
Copy link
Contributor

since the original commit never landed I'm labeling this dont land for LTS.

@Trott Trott deleted the lint-revert branch January 13, 2022 22:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants