[WIP] V7.0.0 proposal (beta) #8503
Conversation
jasnell
added
wip
nodejs-github-bot
added
build
mscdex
removed
build
|
@jasnell where can we find the weekly beta builds? |
|
I have not yet generated the first one. The first will be available in https://nodejs.org/download/rc/ later on today. |
jasnell
force-pushed
the
v7.0.0-proposal
branch
from
d9d5789 to
98fd4cb
Compare
|
Ok, change that... the first beta build is available here: https://nodejs.org/download/test/v7.0.0-test2016092198fd4cb7d5/ the only thing missing is the raspbian build. |
|
For anyone coming to this thread wanting to install these builds with NVM_NODEJS_ORG_MIRROR=https://nodejs.org/download/test nvm install v7 |
|
Should we bump the |
If that’s easily possible, I think so, yes. We might want to bump straight to (/cc @zcbenz fyi) |
Sounds good to me. |
|
I'll do that in the next beta build on Monday On Wednesday, September 21, 2016, Johan Bergström notifications@github.com
|
|
At this point it looks like there may be four dependency version updates pending that could land in v7, all of which are significant, all of which will need @nodejs/ctc signoff in order to land:
As a reminder, we are looking to cut the v7.0.0 release in just about one month from now. If these are going to land, we need the PRs ASAP so that they can be included in the beta builds for testing. I will run the next beta build on Monday Sept 26th. |
Just to make sure I’m not misunderstanding anything – that’s not |
|
alright so: We're tagging |
|
@addaleax ... hopefully the libuv 1.10 update won't be semver-major, but given the trouble that we had with the bump up to 1.9 right before v6, we'll want to be careful and test everything thoroughly. |
@addaleax In principle any minor libuv update should not result in a semver-major bump in Node. Now, mistakes / the unexpected / etc can and do happen. I'll update the libuv update PR tomorrow since there is just 1 patch pending, which is related to z/OS, so we should be able to run the tests and CITGM to see if smoke comes out. EDIT: typos. |
|
@zkat ... if the delta between npm3 and npm4 is small enough then even 2016-10-07 should be ok, especially since it'll likely be a week or two later when we get the v8 stable. I just don't want to drop in a new npm right before release without folks having the opportunity to test things out fully. As you said, however, v7 only has a lifespan of up to 9 months and v6 with npm3 will outlive it so if it works, great, but if it doesn't that should be ok also. If I recall correctly, you said that npm v5 is expected before April next year? |
|
the current plan is for The delta between |
|
I will note it may be pretty odd if npm jumps from @zkat will that deprecation still exist in |
|
@Fishrock123 I'm not sure how long we plan on keeping the deprecation around. I assume it'll be there for a while, but I'm gonna cc @othiym23 to see if he has any concrete timeline for it. |
|
FYI, Ship async-await on V8. https://codereview.chromium.org/2356943002/ |
|
@yosuke-furukawa ... I wouldn't say "supports" in any kind of official way, but async-await is there behind a V8 harmony flag. |
|
it appears that patch landed on master, I would assume the async / await /cc @nodejs/v8 On Sat, Sep 24, 2016, 1:55 PM James M Snell notifications@github.com
|
PR-URL: nodejs#7162 Refs: nodejs#6413 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com>
|
Fourth beta build is underway: https://ci-release.nodejs.org/job/reis-iojs+release/8/console |
|
The fourth beta build is available here: https://nodejs.org/download/test/v7.0.0-test201610107f7d1d385d/ |
PR-URL: nodejs#8941 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#8486 Reviewed-By: Сковорода Никита Андреевич <chalkerx@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
rval never existed, it was added as that in 077f9d7 Fixes: nodejs#9001 PR-URL: nodejs#9023 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <targos@protonmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
Implements WHATWG URL support. Example:
```
var u = new url.URL('http://example.org');
```
Currently passing all WHATWG url parsing tests and all but two of the
setter tests. The two setter tests are intentionally skipped for now
but will be revisited.
PR-URL: nodejs#7448
Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>
Some commit links in the changelogs were pointing to incorrect/missing shas. PR-URL: nodejs#8122 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Fix compile bug when building with the --without-intl option (introduced by 4b31238) PR-URL: nodejs#9041 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com>
SSL_get_SSL_CTX returns the SSL_CTX for an SSL. Previously the code accessed |ssl->ctx| directly, but that's no longer possible with OpenSSL 1.1.0. SSL_get_SSL_CTX exists all the way back to (at least) OpenSSL 0.9.8 and so this change should be fully compatible. PR-URL: nodejs#8995 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <fedor@indutny.com> Reviewed-By: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@ohtsu.org>
PR-URL: nodejs#9011 Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
|
FYI Chromium 54 is stable https://googlechromereleases.blogspot.com/2016/10/stable-channel-update-for-desktop.html Checking Omaha Proxy shows that 5.4.500.31 is the official version of V8 being shipped as stable, this is the same version we currently have on v7.x-staging 🎉 |
|
+1 On Wednesday, October 12, 2016, Myles Borins notifications@github.com
|
As the CTC grows and has representation from more time zones, we need to embrace asynchronous decision making and rely less on the actual meeting. This change is a proposal for that which, ironically, probably has to be approved at a meeting. PR-URL: nodejs#8945 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Evan Lucas <evanlucas@me.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Michael Dawson <michael_dawson@ca.ibm.com> Reviewed-By: Julien Gilli <jgilli@nodejs.org> Reviewed-By: Rod Vagg <rod@vagg.org> Reviewed-By: Shigeki Ohtsu <ohtsu@ohtsu.org>
Unsanitized paths containing line feed characters can be used for header injection and request splitting so reject them with an exception. There seems to be no reasonable use case for allowing control characters (characters <= 31) while there are several scenarios where they can be used to exploit software bugs so reject control characters altogether. PR-URL: nodejs#8923 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net> Reviewed-By: Evan Lucas <evanlucas@me.com> Reviewed-By: Fedor Indutny <fedor@indutny.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: not-an-aardvark <not-an-aardvark@users.noreply.github.com>
This replaces TickObject with an object literal. This offers performance improvements of up to ~20%. PR-URL: nodejs#8932 Reviewed-By: Claudio Rodriguez <cjrodr@yahoo.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Reiss <me@silverwind.io> Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Johan Bergström <bugs@bergstroem.nu> Reviewed-By: Trevor Norris <trev.norris@gmail.com>
* var to const * add check that expected error is ENOENT * indexOf() to includes() PR-URL: nodejs#8999 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <franziska.hinkelmann@gmail.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#9089 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com>
Wrapped the timer into class to ensure it is cleaned up properly. PR-URL: nodejs#8870 Reviewed-By: Ali Ijaz Sheikh <ofrobots@google.com> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Adds documentation and explicit reasons on why the GitHub web interface button is not used. This was explained in the referenced issue by @thealphanerd. Fixes: nodejs#8893 PR-URL: nodejs#9044 Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
Adds verbose reasons to the documentation on why the Reviewed-By metadata on a pull request is important. This was loosely mentioned as an issue in the referenced issue below, and answered by @addaleax. Ref: nodejs#8893 PR-URL: nodejs#9044 Reviewed-By: Myles Borins <myles.borins@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Stephen Belanger <admin@stephenbelanger.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com>
tick-processor-base.js is a module used by three other tests. It is not a test fixture so move it out of the fixture directory. (One downside to having it in the fixture directory is that fixture code is not currently linted.) It is possible that the code in tick-processor-base.js should be integrated into common.js. This can potentially happen subsequently (and might make a reasonable good first contribution for a new contributor). PR-URL: nodejs#9022 Reviewed-By: Santiago Gimeno <santiago.gimeno@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <luigipinca@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Highlight deprecated API methods/properties in "Table of Contents" for increasing understandability. Adapted code to eslint standards. PR-URL: nodejs#7189 Fixes: nodejs/nodejs.org#772 Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <fishrock123@rocketmail.com> Reviewed-By: Roman Reiss <me@silverwind.io> Reviewed-By: Sakthipriyan Vairamani <thechargingvolcano@gmail.com>
The config.gypi target has a recipe that uses the control function error to report if the config.gypi file is missing or if it is stale (the configure file was updated which is a prerequisite of this rule). GNU make has two phases, immediate and deferred. During the first phase it will expand any variables or functions as the makefile is parsed. The recipe in this case is a shell if statement, which is a deferred construct. But the control function $(error) is an immediate construct which will cause the makefile processing to stop during the first phase of the Make process. If I understand this correctly the only possible outcome of this rule is the "Stale config.gypi, please re-run ./configure" message which will be done in the first phase and then exit. The shell condition will not be considered. So it will never report that the config.gypi is missing. bnoordhuis suggested that we simply change this into a single error message: "Missing or stale config.gypi, please run configure" PR-URL: nodejs#9053 Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl> Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com>
`end` MUST always be emitted **before** `close`. However, if a handle will invoke `uv_close_cb` immediately, or in the same JS tick - `close` may be emitted first. PR-URL: nodejs#9066 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <matteo.collina@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <cjihrig@gmail.com> Reviewed-By: Ilkka Myller <ilkka.myller@nodefield.com>
PR-URL: nodejs#8988 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
|
Merged all of the cherry-picked commits into v7.x branch to prepare for the actual release commits. Opening a new PR to work on the actual release proposal commit. |
This is the start of the v7.0.0 release proposal. Each week until the release a new beta build will be generated from this branch for testing.
Note: this branch includes the beta V8 5.4 commits from #8317. *This PR has not yet landed in master but is expected to do so before v7.0.0 is released. Those commits are included here in order to allow us more time to test v7.0.0 with V8 5.4
This currently does not yet include the release commit that switches to a release build. Nor does it currently include the changedocs. I will generate both of those later.
I had planned on doing a beta build this week but will wait until next week as my schedule is rather busy at the moment.
This is a work in progress PR. Do not land!
/cc @nodejs/ctc @nodejs/citgm @nodejs/testing