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

Upgrades code-mirror, browsermob-proxy and mouse-trap #6940

Merged
merged 33 commits into from
Jun 29, 2019

Conversation

NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor

@NishealJ NishealJ commented Jun 16, 2019

Explanation

This PR Upgrades code-mirror, browsermob-proxy and mouse-trap,
To see the upgrade status please visit here

For testing doc please visit here

Checklist

  • The PR title starts with "Fix #bugnum: ", followed by a short, clear summary of the changes. (If this PR fixes part of an issue, prefix the title with "Fix part of #bugnum: ...".)
  • The PR explanation includes the words "Fixes #bugnum: ..." (or "Fixes part of #bugnum" if the PR only partially fixes an issue).
  • The linter/Karma presubmit checks have passed.
    • These should run automatically, but if not, you can manually trigger them locally using python scripts/pre_commit_linter.py and bash scripts/run_frontend_tests.sh.
  • The PR is made from a branch that's not called "develop".
  • The PR has an appropriate "CHANGELOG: ..." label (If you are unsure of which label to add, ask the reviewers for guidance).
  • The PR follows the style guide.
  • The PR addresses the points mentioned in the codeowner checks for the files/folders changed. (See the codeowner's wiki page.)
  • The PR is assigned to an appropriate reviewer.
    • If you're a new contributor, please ask on Gitter for someone to assign a reviewer and don't tick this checkbox.
    • If you're not sure who the appropriate reviewer is, please assign to the issue's "owner" -- see the "talk-to" label on the issue. Do not only request the review but also add the reviewer as an assignee.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 16, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #6940 into develop will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #6940   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    95.73%   95.73%           
========================================
  Files          371      371           
  Lines        51604    51604           
========================================
  Hits         49404    49404           
  Misses        2200     2200
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
core/tests/gae_suite.py 74.41% <ø> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7cdd42c...8b8a6a9. Read the comment docs.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jun 16, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #6940 into develop will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           develop   #6940   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage     96.7%   96.7%           
=======================================
  Files          374     374           
  Lines        57508   57508           
=======================================
  Hits         55611   55611           
  Misses        1897    1897
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
core/tests/gae_suite.py 74.41% <ø> (ø) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f9a5dec...742557d. Read the comment docs.

@nithusha21
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @NishealJ, just noting that your PRs don't have a changelog label. Could you pick an appropriate one for all of your PRs? Simplifies the release process for us. Also, @apb7 before merging the PRs, could you make sure there is a label? Thanks!

@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @apb7,
here the testing doc Please let me know if you have any specific tests in mind. PTAL Thanks!

@NishealJ NishealJ removed the WIP label Jun 18, 2019
@apb7
Copy link
Contributor

apb7 commented Jun 19, 2019

Hi @NishealJ, can you please add more tests for browsermob-proxy and mouse-trap according to the changelogs (as discussed)? Thanks!

@NishealJ NishealJ added the WIP label Jun 19, 2019
@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @NishealJ, can you please add more tests for browsermob-proxy and mouse-trap according to the changelogs (as discussed)? Thanks!

Hi @apb7, I've updated the testing doc seeing the changelog and the changelog dint had much of breaking of breaking changes Thanks!

@NishealJ NishealJ removed the WIP label Jun 19, 2019
@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @seanlip & @apb7 PTAL Thanks!

@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi @apb7 Addressed your comments Thanks!

@NishealJ NishealJ requested review from apb7 and DubeySandeep June 27, 2019 06:59
@apb7 apb7 unassigned seanlip and apb7 Jun 27, 2019
@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi, @DubeySandeep & @apb7 Addressed all your comments Thanks!

Copy link
Member

@DubeySandeep DubeySandeep left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! (For the changes in e2e test file.)

core/tests/protractor_utils/ExplorationEditorHistoryTab.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
core/tests/protractor_utils/forms.js Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@DubeySandeep DubeySandeep removed their assignment Jun 28, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@nithusha21 nithusha21 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. Just one question.

package-lock.json Show resolved Hide resolved
@nithusha21 nithusha21 removed their assignment Jun 28, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@apb7 apb7 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, thanks @NishealJ!

@seanlip
Copy link
Member

seanlip commented Jun 28, 2019

The Travis tests are failing.

@apb7
Copy link
Contributor

apb7 commented Jun 28, 2019

@NishealJ, the lint tests are failing with the following log:

/home/travis/build/oppia/oppia/core/tests/protractor_utils/forms.js
  644:1  error  Line 644 exceeds the maximum line length of 80  max-len

✖ 1 problem (1 error, 0 warnings)


FAILED    1 JavaScript and Typescript files

Did you bypass the pre-push checks?

@apb7 apb7 removed their assignment Jun 28, 2019
@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, updated the code style I hope it gets a queue fast.
Thankyou @apb7 & @seanlip for the notifications.

@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

@NishealJ, the lint tests are failing with the following log:

/home/travis/build/oppia/oppia/core/tests/protractor_utils/forms.js
  644:1  error  Line 644 exceeds the maximum line length of 80  max-len

✖ 1 problem (1 error, 0 warnings)


FAILED    1 JavaScript and Typescript files

Did you bypass the pre-push checks?

Hi @apb7 I bypassed it thinking the change is very minor and it takes time to run, I usually don't do it for other commits Thanks!

@seanlip
Copy link
Member

seanlip commented Jun 28, 2019

In the future, please never bypass the pre-push checks. Most errors come from exactly that -- i.e. submitters thinking that the change is very minor. Saving 2 minutes at that point can lead to a 2 hour delay while you wait for tests to re-run -- as you've seen!

@NishealJ
Copy link
Contributor Author

In the future, please never bypass the pre-push checks. Most errors come from exactly that -- i.e. submitters thinking that the change is very minor. Saving 2 minutes at that point can lead to a 2 hour delay while you wait for tests to re-run -- as you've seen!

Sure @seanlip, I agree :)!

@apb7 apb7 merged commit 4081b19 into oppia:develop Jun 29, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants