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

Release proposal: node-gyp@5.0.6 #1972

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from
Closed

Release proposal: node-gyp@5.0.6 #1972

wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

rvagg
Copy link
Member

@rvagg rvagg commented Nov 18, 2019

Not sure how much this is needed but it might help npm, I don't see an indication which way they're going with node-gyp@6.


Commits on master that aren't on this branch:

  • [68319a2c34] - v6.0.1: bump version and update changelog (Rod Vagg) #1935
  • [1a4ff636d5] - v6.0.0: bump version and update changelog (Rod Vagg) #1892
  • [dd0e97ef0b] - (SEMVER-MAJOR) lib: try to find python after python3 (Sam Roberts) #1907
  • [f60ed47d14] - travis: add Python 3.5 and 3.6 tests on Linux (Christian Clauss) #1903
  • [c763ca1838] - (SEMVER-MAJOR) doc: Declare that node-gyp is Python 3 compatible (cclauss) #1811
  • [3d1c60ab81] - (SEMVER-MAJOR) lib: accept Python 3 by default (João Reis) #1844
  • [c6e3b65a23] - (SEMVER-MAJOR) lib: raise the minimum Python version from 2.6 to 2.7 (cclauss) #1818

Commits on this branch that aren't on master:

  • [d6041b0f1c] - v5.0.6: bump version and update changelog (Rod Vagg)
  • [3891391746] - doc: reconcile README with Python 3 compat changes (Rod Vagg) #1911
  • [07f81f1920] - lib: accept Python 3 after Python 2 (Sam Roberts) #1910
  • [3834156a92] - test: add Python 3.5 and 3.6 tests on Linux (cclauss) #1909

(.travis.yml isn't materially different between the branches even with those commit discrepancies)

Changes in this release:

  • [cdec00286f] - doc: adjustments to the README.md for new users (Dan Pike) #1919
  • [b7c8233ef2] - test: fix Python unittests (cclauss) #1961
  • [e12b00ab0a] - doc: macOS Catalina add two commands (Christian Clauss) #1962
  • [70b9890c0d] - test: add header download test (Rod Vagg) #1796
  • [4029fa8629] - test: configure proper devDir for invoking configure() (Rod Vagg) #1796
  • [fe8b02cc8b] - doc: add macOS_Catalina.md document (cclauss) #1940
  • [8ea47ce365] - gyp: python3 fixes: utf8 decode, use of 'None' in eval (Wilfried Goesgens) #1925
  • [c7229716ba] - gyp: iteritems() -> items() in compile_commands_json.py (cclauss) #1947
  • [2a18b2a0f8] - gyp: make cmake python3 compatible (gengjiawen) #1944
  • [70f391e844] - gyp: fix TypeError in XcodeVersion() (Christian Clauss) #1939
  • [9f4f0fa34e] - gyp: finish decode stdout on Python 3 (Christian Clauss) #1937
  • [7cf507906d] - src,win: allow 403 errors for arm64 node.lib (Richard Lau) #1934
  • [ad0d182c01] - deps: update deps to roughly match current npm@6 (Rod Vagg) #1920
  • [1553081ed6] - test: upgrade Linux Travis CI to Python 3.8 (Christian Clauss) #1923
  • [0705cae9aa] - travis: ignore failed brew upgrade npm, update xcode (Christian Clauss) #1932
  • [7bfdb6f5bf] - build: avoid bare exceptions in xcode_emulation.py (Christian Clauss) #1932
  • [7edf7658fa] - lib,install: always download SHA sums on Windows (Sam Hughes) #1926
  • [69056d04fe] - travis: add Windows + Python 3.8 to the mix (Rod Vagg) #1921

The main risk here is in the dependency version changes from #1920.

@cclauss
Copy link
Contributor

cclauss commented Nov 18, 2019

Nice work as always @rvagg

We need to get Travis to be green again and also, given nodejs/node-v8#119 (comment) perhaps we should set our lower limit to be Python >= 2.7.9.

@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Nov 20, 2019

Sorry, you'll have to spoon feed me, i don't grok what's going on - does this demonstrably break for users of 2.6 (if there are any) or is this a linting failure or test-specific failure?
Bumping minimum Python version should be considered semver-major as we've discussed before so if we can just maintain where we're at with 5.x then that would be best. Is there a commit I can roll back here?

@cclauss
Copy link
Contributor

cclauss commented Nov 20, 2019

The change in question is not in this repo but is in our dependency nodejs/node-v8#119 (comment). That code makes it convoluted to support both Python < 2.7.9 and Python 3.

rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2019
@rvagg rvagg closed this Dec 16, 2019
@rvagg rvagg force-pushed the rvagg/v5.0.6-proposal branch from d6041b0 to 8ca4156 Compare December 16, 2019 00:18
@rvagg rvagg deleted the rvagg/v5.0.6-proposal branch December 16, 2019 00:19
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 16, 2019
@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Dec 16, 2019

it looks like npm wants to stick with v5 for npm v6, so we should still maintain these

I've published 5.0.6 from this, but we have a few things in the queue to warrant a 5.1.0 soon:

I'd like to see that proxy change bake in the wild first, I'm sure there are people that will grab v6 just for that one.

@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Dec 16, 2019

I had to publish a v5.0.7 on top of this, same commits but with a pack file removed from the pack file ... something i've done far too often but keep on doing. I ran npm pack to inspect the contents of what's being published, but then didn't remove the pack file so an npm publish packs up the pack file.

@richardlau
Copy link
Member

I had to publish a v5.0.7 on top of this, same commits but with a pack file removed from the pack file ... something i've done far too often but keep on doing. I ran npm pack to inspect the contents of what's being published, but then didn't remove the pack file so an npm publish packs up the pack file.

That's what --dry-run is for? I'm not opposed to adding the pack file to .gitignore/.npmignore or explicitly listing the files to include in package.json (like we did in CITGM: nodejs/citgm#704).

@rvagg
Copy link
Member Author

rvagg commented Dec 20, 2019

That's what --dry-run is for?

yeah, probably, it's just a habit I need to break at some point, my fault and I don't think we need special handling for it

rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 3, 2020
Republish of v5.0.6 but with node-gyp-v5.0.6.tar.gz removed from pack file

PR-URL: #1972
rvagg added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2020
Republish of v5.0.6 but with node-gyp-v5.0.6.tar.gz removed from pack file

PR-URL: #1972
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.

3 participants