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

Attempt to migrate to Node20 #870

Merged
merged 10 commits into from
May 17, 2024

Conversation

mikaelarguedas
Copy link
Contributor

@mikaelarguedas mikaelarguedas commented May 10, 2024

Workflows complains that action-ros-ci is on EOL node 16: https://github.blog/changelog/2023-09-22-github-actions-transitioning-from-node-16-to-node-20/

Depends on ros-tooling/setup-ros#679

Closes #861
Closes #856
Closes #854
Closes #853
Closes #850

@mikaelarguedas mikaelarguedas requested review from emersonknapp and a team as code owners May 10, 2024 10:45
@mikaelarguedas mikaelarguedas requested review from MichaelOrlov and removed request for a team May 10, 2024 10:45
@christophebedard christophebedard self-requested a review May 10, 2024 23:21
@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

It feels like I bumped to Node.js 16 just a few months ago, but it was over a year ago 😆 #778

@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

christophebedard commented May 10, 2024

Thanks for the PR! This looks great to me! Could you just update the version mentioned here to v20?

We are currently using Node.js v16.

You'll also need to update to node-version: "20.x" under actions/setup-node everywhere.

Copy link

codecov bot commented May 11, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 62.50000% with 3 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 27.39%. Comparing base (8cf3d2d) to head (3bf3c7e).

❗ Current head 3bf3c7e differs from pull request most recent head 2490c3c. Consider uploading reports for the commit 2490c3c to get more accurate results

Files Patch % Lines
src/action-ros-ci.ts 50.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #870       +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage   44.55%   27.39%   -17.17%     
===========================================
  Files           2        2               
  Lines         303      303               
  Branches       81       81               
===========================================
- Hits          135       83       -52     
- Misses        168      220       +52     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@mikaelarguedas
Copy link
Contributor Author

will likely need to wait for ros-tooling/setup-ros#679 to then rerun CI as 9b03fde made all the jobs fail

@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

It seems like this part of the tests might make CI fail now: https://github.com/ros-tooling/action-ros-ci/actions/runs/9050675407/job/24866327260?pr=870#step:5:86

@mikaelarguedas
Copy link
Contributor Author

mikaelarguedas commented May 13, 2024

Yeah weird, this comes from @actions/exec that is the only @action lib that was already at the latest version 🤷

@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

I found this issue: actions/toolkit#1625

but I just removed the test and it still fails, so it must be something else 🤔

Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Mikael Arguedas <mikael.arguedas@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Christophe Bedard <christophe.bedard@apex.ai>
Signed-off-by: Christophe Bedard <christophe.bedard@apex.ai>
Signed-off-by: Christophe Bedard <christophe.bedard@apex.ai>
@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

christophebedard commented May 14, 2024

I'm able to run tests locally by defining some GITHUB_* env vars:

$ GITHUB_REPOSITORY="owner/repo" GITHUB_WORKSPACE="/ws" npm test

I started commenting out a bunch of stuff here and there and found out two things:

  1. Having the run(); line in action-ros-ci.ts and importing it in the test file executes that line, which results in the full action being run. We definitely did not intend to run the full action as part of these unit tests. Looking at setup-ros, its run() function is called in setup-ros.ts, which is never imported in its tests: https://github.com/ros-tooling/setup-ros/blob/8147828f7d9cb47d5807984e89f05c268c0cf0fb/src/setup-ros.ts#L28. Therefore, I moved the run(); line to a separate file that we don't import in the test file.
  2. Even with the above fix, the issue persists. What really makes the test command return with a non-zero return code is the call to core.setFailed(), which sets the process' return code to 1 ❗ https://github.com/actions/toolkit/blob/main/packages/core/src/core.ts#L221. Therefore, I just reset the process' exit code to 0 in the test. I tried mocking core.setFailed() instead, but couldn't get it to work easily, and I don't have much more time for this for now.

@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

by defining some GITHUB_* env vars:

This isn't necessary with the changes related to item 1 above.

@mikaelarguedas
Copy link
Contributor Author

Nice thanks @christophebedard for picking this up!

Looks like now CI failures are the same as on master ? or is there more work to do on this one to get it over the finish line ?

Copy link
Member

@christophebedard christophebedard left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, I think this is good. I'll merge this and then create new releases of both setup-ros and action-ros-ci.

@christophebedard christophebedard merged commit 36b8e42 into ros-tooling:master May 17, 2024
29 of 37 checks passed
@christophebedard
Copy link
Member

I released this as 0.3.13/v0.3.

@mikaelarguedas mikaelarguedas deleted the node20 branch May 17, 2024 14:30
@christophebedard christophebedard mentioned this pull request May 29, 2024
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.

2 participants