Giter VIP home page Giter VIP logo

Comments (9)

addaleax avatar addaleax commented on July 22, 2024 2

Closing this since it doesn’t seem to be worth pursuing, or at least not everybody feels 100 % comfortable with this :)

from ayo.

Qard avatar Qard commented on July 22, 2024 1

It's a bit safer with that change though. It makes it harder to tamper with the value.

Personally I see no reason to omit these commits, but I'm not hard opposed to it.

from ayo.

sandfox avatar sandfox commented on July 22, 2024

Seems ok? Do you want to keep them out for ever, or just until such time as we feel like doing bumping our semver major number?

from ayo.

addaleax avatar addaleax commented on July 22, 2024

So … assuming our release tooling is going to work like Node’s, what I’d do is revert them in master. They’d be excluded until somebody reverts the reverts ;)

from ayo.

sandfox avatar sandfox commented on July 22, 2024

sounds good, I guess my only remaining question is how to keep track of things that have been kept out? I guess we could just search the reverts at some later point, but we'd still need to remember / write that down somewhere.

from ayo.

ljharb avatar ljharb commented on July 22, 2024

I'm confused why the EOL change in particular seems problematic - are people overwriting os.EOL such that them switching from assignment to defineProperty is problematic?

from ayo.

addaleax avatar addaleax commented on July 22, 2024

@sandfox Our release tooling should be pretty good at picking up commits that we have in our branches but Node doesn’t. :)

@ljharb I don’t know for sure. It’s a minor change, sure. But it also changes something that has worked basically forever, and I think we should have a better reason to justify changing that than “this should have been different from the beginning”.

from ayo.

ljharb avatar ljharb commented on July 22, 2024

Gotcha. I'd assume it can avoid issues with someone unintentionally mutating the core os object.

Has anyone run an npm search to determine if anything would break? Change for the sake of change seems just as bad as reverts solely for the sake of avoiding change :-)

from ayo.

Fishrock123 avatar Fishrock123 commented on July 22, 2024

Has anyone run an npm search to determine if anything would break? Change for the sake of change seems just as bad as reverts solely for the sake of avoiding change :-)

Node usually already does such things.

Neither of these seem particularly detrimental to me.

from ayo.

Related Issues (20)

Recommend Projects

  • React photo React

    A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.

  • Vue.js photo Vue.js

    🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.

  • Typescript photo Typescript

    TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.

  • TensorFlow photo TensorFlow

    An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone

  • Django photo Django

    The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.

  • D3 photo D3

    Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉

Recommend Topics

  • javascript

    JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.

  • web

    Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.

  • server

    A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.

  • Machine learning

    Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.

  • Game

    Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.

Recommend Org

  • Facebook photo Facebook

    We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.

  • Microsoft photo Microsoft

    Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.

  • Google photo Google

    Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.

  • D3 photo D3

    Data-Driven Documents codes.