-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 929
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
refactor(person)!: rename name module #1445
Conversation
Blocked by: |
@ST-DDT I'm not sure if we want to support |
Okay, this is now in a done / ready for review state, but I want to first merge the cleanup deprecations as of that will reduce some changes. |
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## next #1445 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 99.62% 99.63% +0.01%
==========================================
Files 2164 2164
Lines 236815 236854 +39
Branches 1003 1003
==========================================
+ Hits 235916 235984 +68
+ Misses 877 849 -28
+ Partials 22 21 -1
|
dd71093
to
09f53e7
Compare
I don't know why this works, but it works. |
Co-authored-by: ST-DDT <ST-DDT@gmx.de>
b6096f8
to
0165a90
Compare
in addition to the new faker.person tests, why not keep the existing tests for the faker.name module ?
That will help ensure no unexpected regressions/breaking changes. |
Because it is just an alias, behind it there is exactly the same code, so no need to test it twice. |
I'm a bit lost, shouldn't this follow our normal deprecation workflow? As now a user has no time-window to migrate, but have to rework their codebase. Is this desired even if this will be in a breaking change? |
Sorry, too many files. Didn't saw the getter in the Faker class. So if this follows the typical deprecation workflow, we need to keep the tests as @matthewmayer suggested. Even is if is just an alias, how do you confirm that it is that way? The test would also catch breaking changes in the |
I'm not sure whether I get you right. |
TODO: Create an issue to remove the special handling in v10.0 after this is merged (to get the final line numbers and commit references). |
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.
LGTM :)
closes #1343