Skip to content

[Bridge/PhpUnit] Relax expectedDeprecation for forward compat #21186

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 6, 2017

Conversation

nicolas-grekas
Copy link
Member

Q A
Branch? 3.2
Bug fix? yes
New feature? no
BC breaks? no
Deprecations? no
Tests pass? yes
Fixed tickets -
License MIT
Doc PR -

Instead of a strict match, this makes the annotation check ignore not expected messages, while still requiring all the expected ones in order.

This is needed for forward compat with future deprecations, and should make travis green again.

@nicolas-grekas nicolas-grekas added this to the 3.2 milestone Jan 6, 2017
@nicolas-grekas nicolas-grekas merged commit a3ba726 into symfony:3.2 Jan 6, 2017
nicolas-grekas added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 6, 2017
…pat (nicolas-grekas)

This PR was merged into the 3.2 branch.

Discussion
----------

[Bridge/PhpUnit] Relax expectedDeprecation for forward compat

| Q             | A
| ------------- | ---
| Branch?       | 3.2
| Bug fix?      | yes
| New feature?  | no
| BC breaks?    | no
| Deprecations? | no
| Tests pass?   | yes
| Fixed tickets | -
| License       | MIT
| Doc PR        | -

Instead of a strict match, this makes the annotation check ignore not expected messages, while still requiring all the expected ones in order.

This is needed for forward compat with future deprecations, and should make travis green again.

Commits
-------

a3ba726 [Bridge/PhpUnit] Relax expectedDeprecation for forward compat
@nicolas-grekas nicolas-grekas deleted the phpunit-deprec branch January 6, 2017 17:59
@stof
Copy link
Member

stof commented Jan 6, 2017

This still enforces the order of deprecations. Shouldn't we assert each expected deprecation separately instead ?

@nicolas-grekas
Copy link
Member Author

We never had an issue with ordering, so no need I'd say, this keeps the implementation simple.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants