-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 175
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
ci: update test workflow and expand test matrix #1086
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why continue to support and encourage the use of end-of-life versions of Node.js? If users want support then they can try to reproduce their problems on a supported version. If folks are paying for long-term support for an OS that has an EOL version of Node.js then their OS provider can support them. If folks are using an OS that is beyond the standard support and are not paying for LTS, then their problems should be demonstrated on supported versions. Building on secure platforms and being able to use new language optimizations and features helps everyone's safety and velocity so let's encourage security and performance upgrades.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This package has an engine version that supports Node.js v12 and above, so dropping support would be a breaking change (and require a major version bump on this package). Any major version bump causes fragmentation with the user base, as can be seen in the npm downloads stats for older versions of this package (it used to be called just
electron-rebuild) where there are still ~6k downloads/week on the final 2.y.z version and ~7.5k downloads/week on the final 1.y.z version. We want to avoid furthering that fragmentation, so we don't want to bump majors more often than we need to (which every Node.js EOL would require). These packages also don't have a ton of maintainer time to put into them, so it takes some time for things to be merged - if we bump the major version we might make the safety issue worse by putting new fixes behind a new major version where they won't be picked up by some subset of the user base. For ease of maintenance these packages aren't setup to do additional releases to old majors, so once we bump majors there are no more fixes being backported to old majors (and we would need the CI to be testing the old Node.js versions those majors support to be able to do so).So the general policy of @~electron/wg-ecosystem is to continue to test and not explicitly drop older Node.js versions unless necessary. We're not encouraging the usage of EOL versions of Node.js, more avoiding breaking them when feasible. In most cases we won't go out of our way to fix bugs which only affect those EOL versions, and if a future change requires dropping support for older EOL versions of Node.js we will explicitly drop support then, if it's deemed necessary.
Hope this makes sense. 🙂
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Users of legacy software create a lot of noise in support channels...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Will that noise really go away if this package stops testing those EOL Node.js versions, though? Even if we drop support and bump the major, some users will stick on the current major (as seen in the npm download stats listed above).
If you tweak the GitHub search to include
created:>2022-01-01, it only returns 16 issues in the past 18 months, and without going beyond flipping through the descriptions shown on the search page, at least 3 of them were reporting supported Node.js versions.It's also worth noting that
node-gypitself is still showing Node.js v12 and v14 as supported engines according topackage.json: https://github.com/nodejs/node-gyp/blob/33391db3a0008eff8408890da6ab232f2f90fcab/package.json#L37-L39There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Rephrase: Will that noise decrease if this package stops encouraging / supporting EOL Node.js versions?
Yes, it will. Developers are improving software and ignoring their efforts is suboptimal on many different levels. Solutions that used to work in older versions of npm, node, and gyp no longer work today. Supporting both legacy and current is complex, frustrating, and error-prone. Doing so for the sake of statistics is a shame.