Skip to content

tests: add dependency constraints to eslint-plugin tests #5916

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Nov 17, 2022
Merged

tests: add dependency constraints to eslint-plugin tests #5916

merged 13 commits into from
Nov 17, 2022

Conversation

bradzacher
Copy link
Member

PR Checklist

Overview

Doing this ahead of #5573 to improve reviewability.
This PR marks all of our dependency requirements for tests back to TSv4.0.8 - I didn't go back further because #5915 bumps the minimum past that anyways

@bradzacher bradzacher added the tests anything to do with testing label Nov 2, 2022
@typescript-eslint
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks for the PR, @bradzacher!

typescript-eslint is a 100% community driven project, and we are incredibly grateful that you are contributing to that community.

The core maintainers work on this in their personal time, so please understand that it may not be possible for them to review your work immediately.

Thanks again!

🙏 Please, if you or your company is finding typescript-eslint valuable, help us sustain the project by sponsoring it transparently on https://opencollective.com/typescript-eslint.

@nx-cloud
Copy link

nx-cloud bot commented Nov 2, 2022 •
edited
Loading

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit 9396b38. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this branch

✅ Successfully ran 46 targets

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Nov 2, 2022 •
edited
Loading

✅ Deploy Preview for typescript-eslint ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 9396b38
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/typescript-eslint/deploys/63756ed625114a0009371037
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-5916--typescript-eslint.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

JoshuaKGoldberg
JoshuaKGoldberg previously approved these changes Nov 13, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🔥

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg enabled auto-merge (squash) November 13, 2022 23:34
@JoshuaKGoldberg
Copy link
Member

JoshuaKGoldberg commented Nov 14, 2022 •
edited
Loading

I see some new test failures after my merge - will try to fix soon... ✅

(they were existing, somewhat)

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg added the awaiting response Issues waiting for a reply from the OP or another party label Nov 15, 2022
JoshuaKGoldberg
JoshuaKGoldberg requested changes Nov 15, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

non-nullable-type-assertion-style has a failure - otherwise this looks good to go!

@bradzacher bradzacher removed the awaiting response Issues waiting for a reply from the OP or another party label Nov 16, 2022
@bradzacher bradzacher mentioned this pull request Nov 16, 2022
Merged
1 task
@bradzacher
Copy link
Member Author

bradzacher commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Interestingly the changes to that failing test have exposed a bug in our underlying project caching logic!
Fix is in #5999

I merged #5999 into this PR, so we'll have to wait for that one to land first.

@bradzacher bradzacher added the blocked by another PR PRs which are ready to go but waiting on another PR label Nov 16, 2022
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Codecov Report

Merging #5916 (9396b38) into main (530e0e6) will decrease coverage by 0.13%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

Additional details and impacted files 
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #5916      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   91.42%   91.29%   -0.14%     
==========================================
  Files         365      365              
  Lines       12342    12343       +1     
  Branches     3610     3610              
==========================================
- Hits        11284    11268      -16     
- Misses        753      767      +14     
- Partials      305      308       +3
Flag Coverage Δ
unittest 91.29% <100.00%> (-0.14%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...s/utils/src/eslint-utils/rule-tester/RuleTester.ts 70.23% <100.00%> (-15.31%) ⬇️
.../eslint-utils/rule-tester/dependencyConstraints.ts 66.66% <0.00%> (-33.34%) ⬇️

JoshuaKGoldberg
JoshuaKGoldberg approved these changes Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🔥

@bradzacher bradzacher merged commit 4d46e65 into main Nov 17, 2022
@bradzacher bradzacher deleted the add-dep-constraints-to-rule-tests branch November 17, 2022 00:03
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Nov 24, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers

@JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg JoshuaKGoldberg approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
blocked by another PR PRs which are ready to go but waiting on another PR tests anything to do with testing
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@bradzacher @JoshuaKGoldberg