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

Fix $PSNativeCommandArgPassing = Windows to handle empty args correctly #16639

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 12, 2022

Conversation

SteveL-MSFT
Copy link
Member

@SteveL-MSFT SteveL-MSFT commented Dec 16, 2021

PR Summary

When the new Windows mode was added to $PSNativeCommandArgPassing, the PR didn't change some of the logic as it only expected Standard and Legacy. The intent was that Windows would be Standard, but have exception to fallback to Legacy for a specific set of extensions and executables to maintain compatibility. This resulted in Windows having the Legacy behavior when it came to empty args which get dropped. The fix is to change the handling so instead of checking for Standard it checks if it's not Legacy.

PR Context

Brought to my attention by .NET team member

PR Checklist

@pull-request-quantifier-deprecated

This PR has 19 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!


Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +16 -3
Percentile : 7.6%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +2 -2
.ps1 : +14 -1

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

  • Fast and predictable releases to production:
    • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
      iterations.
    • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
  • Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
    • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
    • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detetcted.
  • Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
    • Small portions can be assimilated better.
  • Better engineering practices are exercised:
    • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
    • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

  • Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
    • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
    • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
    • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Change your engineering behaviors
    • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
      • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
      • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

  • One line was added: +1 -0
  • One line was deleted: +0 -1
  • One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
    interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
  • Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
    of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.


Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

@ghost ghost added the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Dec 24, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 24, 2021

This pull request has been automatically marked as Review Needed because it has been there has not been any activity for 7 days.
Maintainer, please provide feedback and/or mark it as Waiting on Author

Copy link
Member

@JamesWTruher JamesWTruher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm

@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw assigned daxian-dbw and unassigned TravisEz13 Jan 12, 2022
@ghost ghost removed the Review - Needed The PR is being reviewed label Jan 12, 2022
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw enabled auto-merge (squash) January 12, 2022 07:20
@daxian-dbw daxian-dbw merged commit 0f21156 into PowerShell:master Jan 12, 2022
@iSazonov iSazonov added the CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log label Jan 12, 2022
TrapGodBrim pushed a commit to TrapGodBrim/PowerShell that referenced this pull request Jan 19, 2022
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Feb 24, 2022

🎉v7.3.0-preview.2 has been released which incorporates this pull request.:tada:

Handy links:

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
CL-General Indicates that a PR should be marked as a general cmdlet change in the Change Log Extra Small
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants