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

Document what runtime environments Helia is tested and supported on #113

Closed
BigLep opened this issue May 4, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Document what runtime environments Helia is tested and supported on #113

BigLep opened this issue May 4, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
need/analysis Needs further analysis before proceeding topic/project-management

Comments

@BigLep
Copy link
Contributor

BigLep commented May 4, 2023

Done Criteria

It is self-service for a user to understand what runtimes the maintainers test Helia with and commit to spending time maintaining (e.g., troubleshooting issues).

Why Important

Sets clear expectations for users as they decide whether to adopt the project.
Make clear for maintainers with what level support they need to maintain as they make changes.

Notes

  1. We should be clear about what the is around versinos.
  2. Where we don't support something, let's be clear that we aren't supporting it.
  3. I assume this is largely dependent on js-libp2p's support policy. We can link to that (or if we need to use this as a forcing function to document it, let's create it.)
  4. I assume we're going to say something like:
    • Node JS: current and active LTS versions
    • Browsers
      • Desktop (last two major versions)
        • Chromium
        • Firefox
        • Safari
      • Mobile/Tablet (last two OS releases)
        • Android Chromium
        • iOS/iPadOS Safari
@achingbrain
Copy link
Member

Historically supported versions have been covered by the IPFS contributing doc though to be fair, it's looking a bit out of date - still talks about webpack and ES2015 doesn't mention browsers or mobile. It could use updating and linking to from here.

To be able to say we support mobile/tablet we need to be able to run the test suite on those platforms in CI.

The various test runners for each environment are found here in aegir so a mobile-browser.js runner could be added there that would then integrate nicely with UCI.

The structure of all the tests in our stack is that they are written using the mocha testing framework which we execute directly in Node.js, on Electron using electron-mocha, and headlessly in browsers via playwright-test which uses playwright under the hood.

There's an issue open against playwright for supporting mobile browsers that's a few years old now so not sure it they're still working towards that, but it looks like browserstack have made progress in testing on devices using playwright so using an external service might be an option, though debugging becomes a lot harder since you aren't running tests locally at that point.

Some further investigation is needed.

achingbrain pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 8, 2024
Co-authored-by: Russell Dempsey <1173416+SgtPooki@users.noreply.github.com>
achingbrain pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 8, 2024
## [@helia/ipns-v3.0.1](https://github.com/ipfs/helia-ipns/compare/@helia/ipns-v3.0.0...@helia/ipns-v3.0.1) (2023-12-08)

### Trivial Changes

* fix docs and aegir dep in subpackages ([#142](ipfs/helia-ipns#142)) ([f66dd71](ipfs/helia-ipns@f66dd71))
* update sibling dependencies ([6ab5ddc](ipfs/helia-ipns@6ab5ddc))
* update sibling dependencies ([d0d84f0](ipfs/helia-ipns@d0d84f0))

### Documentation

* fix typo ([#113](ipfs/helia-ipns#113)) ([d732db9](ipfs/helia-ipns@d732db9))
achingbrain added a commit to ipfs/community that referenced this issue Sep 2, 2024
Updates contributing doc to remove references to obsolete tools, add references to Unified CI and clarify supported platforms

Refs: ipfs/helia#113

---------

Co-authored-by: Steve Loeppky <biglep@protocol.ai>
Co-authored-by: Russell Dempsey <1173416+SgtPooki@users.noreply.github.com>
@SgtPooki SgtPooki added the need/analysis Needs further analysis before proceeding label Oct 24, 2024
@SgtPooki
Copy link
Member

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
need/analysis Needs further analysis before proceeding topic/project-management
Projects
No open projects
Status: 🔎 In Review
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants