Skip to content

tools: add new headers to tarball #20925

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jasnell
Copy link
Member

@jasnell jasnell commented May 24, 2018

Missed in #20789 (I had mistakenly assumed the headers were picked up from the listing in node.gyp... and regular CI doesn't cover this).

Fixes: #20921

This needs to be fast tracked and a new 10.2.1 release spun up as soon as it lands.

/cc @richardlau @MylesBorins

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the build Issues and PRs related to build files or the CI. label May 24, 2018
@jasnell jasnell mentioned this pull request May 24, 2018
Copy link
Member

@richardlau richardlau left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can't test this ATM but otherwise LGTM.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

@jasnell Out of interest, what's the reason this is a better choice than moving the referenced headers to node_internals.h?

@gireeshpunathil
Copy link
Member

+1 for fast tracking.

addaleax
addaleax previously approved these changes May 24, 2018
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

@nodejs/release I agree with @jasnell, we should get out 10.2.1 with this asap

Copy link
Member

@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you prefix the filenames with node_? A filename like core.h is way too generic, that's going to create name conflicts.

Having said that, I don't really see a reason for these files to exist. I'd move them back into node.h, they're public API anyway.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented May 24, 2018

As an alternative, we can do a quick revert on the original change, get a fixed 10.2.1 out, then revisit the original change. Given the slight push back and the need to get a fixed release out, the revert is likely the better short term choice. See #20938

@addaleax addaleax dismissed their stale review May 24, 2018 14:23

See Ben’s comment

addaleax added a commit to addaleax/node that referenced this pull request May 24, 2018
Alternative to nodejs#20938
(clean revert) and nodejs#20925
(adding the headers to the release tarball).

The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the
same ways as nodejs#20938 does it,
the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here.

This has the advantage of not being another large diff that
other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since
the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is
something that we want to keep in the long run.

This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from
nodejs#20925.
@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented May 24, 2018

Let's close this one and go with either #20938 or #20939 (likely the latter before the former)

@jasnell jasnell closed this May 24, 2018
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 24, 2018
Alternative to #20938
(clean revert) and #20925
(adding the headers to the release tarball).

The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the
same ways as #20938 does it,
the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here.

This has the advantage of not being another large diff that
other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since
the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is
something that we want to keep in the long run.

This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from
#20925.

PR-URL: #20939
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 24, 2018
Alternative to #20938
(clean revert) and #20925
(adding the headers to the release tarball).

The changes to `src/node.h` are a clean revert in the
same ways as #20938 does it,
the difference being that the new `.cc` files are kept here.

This has the advantage of not being another large diff that
other PRs will have to rebase against, especially since
the split into `callback_scope.cc` and `exceptions.cc` is
something that we want to keep in the long run.

This essentialy implements bnoordhuis’s suggestion from
#20925.

PR-URL: #20939
Reviewed-By: Richard Lau <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <[email protected]>
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