add eslint, custom search & fix mem leak #448
Conversation
|
Hey @lynchem thanks a lot! I am checking this out now. I'm willing to merge this as is, however I'd like to emphasize, that we decided for ease of use to use |
|
@ricaragao do you also use aldeed:tabular? if so, I'd like to ask you to join here for review :-) |
|
First off thank you so much @lynchem for following up to the forums thread and bringing this PR to the light! I'm quite content with the current changes albeit there're two things that we're ought to do:
Looking forward to your response, thanks! |
|
Hey folks. thanks for the feedback.
Yeah, I know storyteller mentioned standardjs. I didn't switch it direct though as the PR would be a lot bigger if I did. Personally I'm not a fan of leaving out the ; but happy to conform 😆
I can definitely add some unit tests.
I don't think it's giant at this stage. And that's actually quite difficult to do to apply each in isolation. I think if we spend more time on it it would be better to address the issues listed in the initial comment. |
|
@lynchem @harryadel I fixed the merge conflict. I think the biggest contribution would be a few tests so we can catch regressions in the future. If there are some tests added I can setup the CI. However, this is not as trivial using Tinytest (even with mtest) as it is using Mocha. If you are fine with Mocha (which I suggest we should use to benefit from |
If that's easy for you to do @jankapunkt that'd be great 👍🏻 |
|
I have reviewed the code and it seems LGTM. @jankapunkt I have added a test in other pr #450 which might be a starting point for CI |
|
Hi @jankapunkt , sorry I missed your message. I will review and test it too. |
|
Please guys let's not let this good PR go to waste. @ricaragao Did you test things out? @jankapunkt What else do we need before merging in? |
|
From my end I'm rather waiting on some feedback from others who tested this a bit in their setups. I can also create an RC release if that's easier for testing. Just let me know. Once I got some response / green light I will update the tests to mocha/chai/sinon and move forward. |
|
Issuing a new release candidate would be amazing, please do so. Either way for @ricaragao or anybody else who wants to test things this would be a lot easier then modifying the package locally. |
|
Hi folks. Apologies. I've let this slip off my radar a bit. I should probably fix the first two elements so as not to make the package too confusing. And if you can update the tests that'd be great Jan. Let me try get something together tonight/tomorrow |
|
I've done those, just need a final test and tidy up and I'll push this afternoon. |
* prefix all search props with 'search' * allow some defaults to be configured * switch default search inclusion to same as regular search - which is true
|
@lynchem am I to take that we are ready to proceed here to the next stage (RC)? |
|
Ok, I've made those changes
Yes Jan... If you can publish a version I can test it in our project |
|
@StorytellerCZ let's create an extra branch for this from master before merging into maste |
|
let me quickly fix the merge conflicts |
|
Okay I just found we have a little issue here @lynchem @StorytellerCZ The I would try to simply merge master back into devel and update this PR so we should be good. Any objections? |
|
Doh... if you want to rebase the MCP devel branch I could sync my devel branch and cherry pick the commits I made in master into that so we have a devel->devel PR ? Or is there a more sensible way ? |
|
Hi guys, I was out. Let me know what I can help. |
|
@lynchem I can also for now merge this into another master-based branch so you all can test this on your setups and in the meantime we can figure out the differences that we need from I recently replaced rebase + cherry-pick with |
|
So I had a look at what the 3 commits that devel was ahead of master on. They were actually the result of a PR I made ages ago that @StorytellerCZ merged a couple months back. It was one change in 2 commits plus the merge commit from Jan. I had actually incorporated this in my changes in master as this was based off our local copy. I've just merged devel into master on my repo so that it doesn't see it as missing anything. I could now reset my devel branch to be master and we could switch this PR to go devel->devel or if you have a better idea let me know (or feel free to do it if its straightforward). |
|
Hey @lynchem thanks for investigating. My proposal would be to simply replicate this procedure here, too:
|
|
Ok, cool. So I think it's ok to merge now. Once merged I'll reset my fork to the MCP one and do any future stuff in the devel branch. Once published I'll give it a test with one of our apps 👍🏻 |
|
@lynchem great I will merge tonight and let you know. By the way I can also add you to this repo as collaborator if you want, makes things a bit easier in terms of collectively pushing to PR branches, assign for reviews etc. |
|
Great work guys 👏 |
NOTE: I'm just opening a draft for discussion. Possibly quite a few things here which should be changed first - this was done quickly for our needs. I tried to keep all of the changes that others have made since I forked.
Changes:
Todo:
I won't have much time next week but will try to look at any feedback and update by the following one (16/10)
@StorytellerCZ @harryadel