Fix ESM node processes being unable to fork into other scripts #1814

devversion · 2022-06-24T13:57:44Z

Currently, Node processes instantiated through the --esm flag result
in a child process being created so that the ESM loader can be
registered. This works fine and is reasonable.

The child process approach to register ESM hooks currently prevents
the NodeJS fork method from being used because the execArgv
propagated into forked processes causes ts-node (which is also
propagated as child exec script -- this is good because it allows nested
type resolution to work) to always execute the original entry-point,
causing potential infinite loops because the designated fork module
script is not executed as expected.

This commit fixes this by not encoding the entry-point information into
the state that is captured as part of the execArgv. Instead the
entry-point information is always retrieved from the parsed rest command
line arguments in the final stage (phase4).

Fixes #1812.

codecov · 2022-06-24T14:10:20Z

Codecov Report

Merging #1814 (58ddc33) into main (ad01f49) will increase coverage by 0.07%.
The diff coverage is 97.29%.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
src/bin.ts	`87.70% <95.00%> (+0.54%)`	⬆️
src/child/argv-payload.ts	`100.00% <100.00%> (ø)`
src/child/child-entrypoint.ts	`92.85% <100.00%> (+1.19%)`	⬆️
src/child/spawn-child.ts	`73.68% <100.00%> (-6.32%)`	⬇️
src/configuration.ts	`85.60% <0.00%> (-0.47%)`	⬇️

devversion · 2022-06-24T14:22:54Z

@cspotcode Just FYI: I re-pushed because I didn't realize older versions are tested as well. Switched the tests from the node next resolution to just esnext and added another test for nodenext that is guarded for TS 4.7.

The nightly node failures seem to also happen in main and I will ignore these as part of this PR.

cspotcode · 2022-06-24T14:24:59Z

Yeah the nightly node failure is due to some ESM changes they're making, you can ignore those. Also, please don't hesitate to ping me for guidance on any other test failures, to avoid frustration. Sometimes having such a big test matrix means it can be difficult for a new contributor to understand what's going on, and I might have some hard-earned occult intuition to help out.

devversion · 2022-06-24T15:05:32Z

Okay, I pushed again. Should fix the previous CI failures due the use of import.meta.url in TS versions which don't know about it. Other than that, I think the tests should be passing now.

https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/runs/7043357305?check_suite_focus=true#step:15:609 is a little confusing to me, but that might have been just flakiness. I tried with the same Node version and couldn't reproduce.

devversion · 2022-06-28T21:36:01Z

Hey, just FYI that this PR is ready from my side now. No rush, please let me know if I can do anything. Thanks!

cspotcode · 2022-07-02T18:13:33Z

src/bin.ts

@@ -48,7 +48,7 @@ export function main(
  const state: BootstrapState = {
    shouldUseChildProcess: false,
    isInChildProcess: false,
-    entrypoint: __filename,
+    tsNodeScript: __filename,


Was this renamed to indicate that this is the path to ts-node's bootstrapper, but not the user's desired entrypoint?

Yes, I renamed that mostly to avoid the ambiguity here (at least ambiguity to me). Happy to revert if you would want it the old way.

Renaming is good, makes sense to me.

cspotcode · 2022-07-02T18:28:23Z

src/bin.ts

+ * Stages before (phase 4) can and will be cached by the child process through the Brotli
+ * configuration and entry-point information is only reliable in the final phase. More
+ * details can be found in here: https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/issues/1812.
+ */


Thanks for adding all these comments.

It makes sense to me that we must repeat resolution in phase 4. Are there any situations where we know, without any risk, that we can skip this duplicate resolution? It would be a performance optimization.

If we cannot safely do this, then we shouldn't. But if there's a safe way to do this, then I might try my hand at adding it.

I think we could re-use this when the argvResult has not changed. We only need the rerun this function due to the patches in the child loader entry-point. We could indicate this change through a flag and request re-computation.

This feels like a micro optimization through, not worth it personally as this is just some simple logical expressions.

src/bin.ts

cspotcode · 2022-07-02T18:55:34Z

Thanks @devversion, I have a couple questions but otherwise this is excellent work.

cspotcode · 2022-07-02T19:00:04Z

src/bin.ts

+
+  /** Unresolved.  May point to a symlink, not realpath.  May be missing file extension */
+  const entryPointPath = executeEntrypoint
+    ? resolve(cwd, restArgs[0])


cwd might be the wrong path, if the child process was forked with a different working directory than the parent. The cwd option has always been confusing, let me see if I can figure out why we're using it in the first place.

I think there is an issue with the cwd option. It's quite ambiguous: It doesn't actually control the working directory of the invoked process (kind of surprising). It's mainly used for the script to be resolved and e.g. the tsconfig

@cspotcode I added a new commit (which might be considered a breaking change? to me it sounds like a fix):

The --cwd option now also sets the working directory properly

The working directory is properly preserved when we transition into the child process for ESM.

Added test scenarios for non-ESM --cwd and also for the scenario you outlined in this comment (fork cwd)

I'll have to double-check. The cwd option has never been great, IMO, and as far as I remember, is only there for backwards compatibility to support some legacy use-cases.

It makes ts-node's logic pretend to be in that cwd but without actually changing the process's cwd. So it affects how ts-node's --cwdMode locates the tsconfig, and affects paths in typechecking errors. --cwdMode isn't even the default anymore because it was confusing and the newer default is better. Just goes to show, I don't love the cwd option.

As confusing as it may be, pretty sure we should not be changing it to affect process.cwd(). But I'll have to double-check the old PRs where I cleaned up this logic; it was a couple years ago. I'm not at my computer; will check later today.

It is possible for projects to intentionally launch child processes in a different cwd, right? Either by passing the cwd directly to fork options, or by changing the parent's working directory before forking. We'll need to support that.

Correct. Forking into different working directories should still work. I added a test for this in ESM, but should also make sure with CJS.

We are using the cwd option in a couple of places, and naturally I also expected it to change the initial working directory, similar to how e.g. yarn --cwd works. This allows me to directly call TS node scripts e.g. in the package.json without needing more code or an extra script.

I assume folks also expected the same here, because the option works that way in e.g. yarn and the docs kind of describe it that way.

I fixed this, and added a test. Regardless of what you decide, the additional tests can be helpful. Happy to revert the cwd changes. I believe the semantics should be that way, or the option should be removed altogether (even though it would actually be useful that way -- like yarn --cwd). Proposed semantics:

--cwd changes the working directory before the user entry-point is invoked

The working directory flag is omitted when forking into child processes. It's up to the user then/or defaults to process.cwd() (which might be the initial --cwd if specified)

Unfortunately, I think removal makes most sense to reduce complexity. The option predates my involvement with the project, it's confusing, and node nor tsc has an equivalent --cwd option. There's also programmatic registration scenarios, where ts-node is being registered into an existing process and probably shouldn't be changing the cwd. Could make the cwd option a CLI-only thing, but it's really just messy feature creep.

I make frequent use of git -C so I understand the appeal of --cwd in general. But in this case, it feels like a maintenance liability to keep it around.

Can't remove till the next major, though, cuz it'd be a breaking change.

Yes, it definitely makes some things more difficult. Not too bad IMO though.

Anyway though, I agree that the removal is a good consideration. What are the next steps for this PR?

I think the only thing left is: entrypoint resolution in the first child should use --cwd, vs subsequent forked children should use process.cwd().

The first child process spawned by our --esm flag needs to obey the CLI's --cwd option for backwards compatibility. (ugh annoying) So if you are in /project and you run ts-node --cwd foo bar.ts then the entrypoint needs to be resolved to /project/foo/bar.ts

Subsequently forked children should behave like vanilla node and resolve their entrypoint relative to process.cwd()
If you process.chdir('/home/user') and do fork('script.ts'), the child's entrypoint needs to resolve to /home/user/script.ts.

I think this means we need to pass a boolean to child processes telling them if they are the first child spawned by --esm, or they are a subsequent child spawned by fork(). child-entrypoint.ts will need to modify the execArgv array to pass this flag to subsequent children. One method is a new --is-first-child=true|false flag, another method is to modify and re-compress the brotli payload.

Maybe there are other benefits to re-compressing the brotli payload: #1831
I'm not suggesting we implement #1831 in this PR, more thinking that re-compressing the brotli payload in this PR will have benefits for future work.

devversion · 2022-07-03T12:38:30Z

src/bin.ts

-      return callInChild(state);
+      // Note: When transitioning into the child-process after `phase2`,
+      // the updated working directory needs to be preserved.
+      return callInChild(state, state.phase2Result.targetCwd);


This explicit cwd pass-through is not strictly needed since spawn would just use the working directory we switched to, but I think being explicit is helping with readability and also makes this safer

Currently, Node processes instantiated through the `--esm` flag result in a child process being created so that the ESM loader can be registered. This works fine and is reasonable. The child process approach to register ESM hooks currently prevents the NodeJS `fork` method from being used because the `execArgv` propagated into forked processes causes `ts-node` (which is also propagated as child exec script -- this is good because it allows nested type resolution to work) to always execute the original entry-point, causing potential infinite loops because the designated fork module script is not executed as expected. This commit fixes this by not encoding the entry-point information into the state that is captured as part of the `execArgv`. Instead the entry-point information is always retrieved from the parsed rest command line arguments in the final stage (`phase4`). Fixes TypeStrong#1812.

…hild process Currently the `--esm` option does not necessarily do what the documentation suggests. i.e. the script does not run as if the working directory is the specified directory. This commit fixes this, so that the option is useful for TSConfig resolution, as well as for controlling the script working directory. Also fixes that the CWD encoded in the bootstrap brotli state for the ESM child process messes with the entry-point resolution, if e.g. the entry-point in `child_process.fork` is relative to a specified `cwd`.

devversion · 2022-07-12T18:27:03Z

@cspotcode Ah thanks for helping out here. I was actually working quite some time today and yesterday on always using the brotli payload (even without esm). I have something for this pretty soon, but I'm not sure if we want to land it as part of this PR.

It's a breaking change as you realized as well because it will always use the same preloaded project. I think that is worth doing though.

devversion · 2022-07-12T18:27:47Z

do you want me to push that here or how should we proceed? The cwd option will behave like before (like you suggested)

cspotcode · 2022-07-12T18:33:44Z

@cspotcode Ah thanks for helping out here. I was actually working quite some time today and yesterday on always using the brotli payload (even without esm). I have something for this pretty soon, but I'm not sure if we want to land it as part of this PR.

It's a breaking change as you realized as well because it will always use the same preloaded project. I think that is worth doing though.

Oh that's great, probably it should be a separate PR tied to #1831 to be shipped in the next major. I think as soon as this PR lands and ships, I should switch gears fully to powering through all the breaking changes for the next major. That'll also drop support for ancient node and TS versions, so it's simplify the development process.

Sorry if I was stepping on your toes a bit, TBH sometimes PRs get dropped when people get tired of my notes about backwards-compat, so I just carry them over the finish line myself. :)

My changes:

I removed the sanitizeArgv logic in favor of #1834 and/or #1831
I removed the process.chdir()
I modified the child process to re-compress the brotli payload to tell grandchild processes that they should resolve entrypoints relative to process.cwd() like vanilla node. I tried my best to put comments linking this logic to #1834 for continued discussion

If the tests pass, then I think this is ready to merge and publish. But please do let me know if I missed anything.

cspotcode · 2022-07-12T18:45:24Z

Oops, I forgot to update the tests since they use --cwd, I assume that's why CI failed. I also haven't code-reviewed them yet, I might have time tonight for that. I'll post here before I attempt further code changes to avoid conflicting with your work.

cspotcode · 2022-07-12T23:05:08Z

src/test/esm-loader.spec.ts

+        });
+
+        test.suite(
+          'with NodeNext TypeScript resolution and `.mts` extension',


Is this .mts variant still required? I see that the previous test case used regexp matching to avoid import.meta.url. But if we can avoid that issue via transpileOnly, then I think this test case is identical to the previous one?

Likely yes. Although these tests are still a little different:

One loads the worker through an absolute path

One loads the worker relatively

cspotcode · 2022-07-12T23:05:42Z

To avoid duplicated effort: I've started fixing the tests, and I'll push what I have soon.

src/test/esm-loader.spec.ts

cspotcode · 2022-07-12T23:22:57Z

tests/esm-child-process/process-forking-nested-esm-node-next/index.mts

+process.exitCode = 1;
+
+const projectDir = dirname(fileURLToPath(import.meta.url));
+const workerProcess = fork(join(projectDir, 'worker.mts'), [], {


Why does this test case use an absolute path for the worker's entrypoint? Is it testing something that hasn't occurred to me? I figure it should be same as the other tests.

See response above. One test, with .mts I used import.meta.url to construct an absolute path to the worker. The other tests were not using import.meta (and couldn't --without transpile-only) and use a relative path.

Ok cool, sounds like all the things we need to test are:

entrypoint script runs with correct process.cwd()

fork() entrypoint resolves with absolute path

fork() entrypoint resolves with relative path relative to process.cwd(), not parent's ts-node --cwd flag

...for both CJS and ESM, with 3. disabled in the non-ESM case since that bug will be fixed by other tickets.

I'll update the PR now.

… resolution but not process.cwd()

disable non --esm test with comment about known bug and link to tickets make tests set cwd for fork() call, to be sure it is respected and not overridden by --cwd

…nding import.meta.url syntax

…ion in code review)

cspotcode · 2022-07-13T00:49:45Z

@devversion I think this is ready to merge and publish. I removed the .mts tests because, as far as I can tell, it is sufficient to test .ts ESM. I'd appreciate your review on that change, but otherwise I think we're ready to go.

As soon as this is merged, I can publish 10.9.0 (https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/milestone/16), and then I think I can start merging breaking changes for 11.0.0 (will combine the https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/milestone/13 and https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/milestone/17 milestones)

devversion · 2022-07-13T19:47:43Z

@cspotcode Thanks for fixing up the rest. I was working on it already but you came first. Much appreciated.

This PR contains the following updates: | Package | Type | Update | Change | |---|---|---|---| | [ts-node](https://typestrong.org/ts-node) ([source](https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node)) | devDependencies | minor | [`10.8.2` -> `10.9.1`](https://renovatebot.com/diffs/npm/ts-node/10.8.2/10.9.1) | --- ### Release Notes <details> <summary>TypeStrong/ts-node</summary> ### [`v10.9.1`](https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/releases/tag/v10.9.1) [Compare Source](TypeStrong/ts-node@v10.9.0...v10.9.1) **Fixed** - Workaround nodejs bug introduced in 18.6.0 ([#1838](TypeStrong/ts-node#1838)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) - Only affects projects on node >=18.6.0 using `--esm` - Older versions of node and projects without `--esm` are unaffected https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/milestone/18?closed=1 ### [`v10.9.0`](https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/releases/tag/v10.9.0) [Compare Source](TypeStrong/ts-node@v10.8.2...v10.9.0) **Added** - `--project` accepts path to a directory containing a `tsconfig.json` ([#1829](TypeStrong/ts-node#1829), [#1830](TypeStrong/ts-node#1830)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) - previously it required an explicit filename - Added helpful error message when swc version is too old to support our configuration ([#1802](TypeStrong/ts-node#1802)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) - Added `experimentalTsImportSpecifiers` option which allows using voluntary `.ts` file extensions in import specifiers (undocumented except for [API docs](https://typestrong.org/ts-node/api/interfaces/CreateOptions.html#experimentalTsImportSpecifiers)) ([#1815](TypeStrong/ts-node#1815)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) **Fixed** - Fixed bug where `child_process.fork()` would erroneously execute the parent's entrypoint script, not the intended child script ([#1812](TypeStrong/ts-node#1812), [#1814](TypeStrong/ts-node#1814)) [@devversion](https://github.com/devversion) - Fixed support for jsx modes `"react-jsx"` and `"react-jsxdev"` in swc transpiler ([#1800](TypeStrong/ts-node#1800), [#1802](TypeStrong/ts-node#1802)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) - Fixed support for import assertions in swc transpiler ([#1817](TypeStrong/ts-node#1817), [#1802](TypeStrong/ts-node#1802)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) - Fixed bug where calling `repl.evalCode()` with code not ending in a newline would not update the typechecker accordingly ([#1764](TypeStrong/ts-node#1764), [#1824](TypeStrong/ts-node#1824)) [@cspotcode](https://github.com/cspotcode) https://github.com/TypeStrong/ts-node/milestone/16?closed=1 </details> --- ### Configuration 📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined). 🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied. ♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox. 🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again. --- - [ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, click this checkbox. --- This PR has been generated by [Renovate Bot](https://github.com/renovatebot/renovate).  Co-authored-by: cabr2-bot <cabr2.help@gmail.com> Reviewed-on: https://codeberg.org/Calciumdibromid/CaBr2/pulls/1461 Reviewed-by: Epsilon_02 <epsilon_02@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-authored-by: Calciumdibromid Bot <cabr2_bot@noreply.codeberg.org> Co-committed-by: Calciumdibromid Bot <cabr2_bot@noreply.codeberg.org>

devversion mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2022

ESM flag breaks NodeJS child process fork #1812

Closed

devversion marked this pull request as ready for review June 24, 2022 13:58

devversion force-pushed the fix-esm-forking branch from 61e47c5 to 3cc59ec Compare June 24, 2022 14:21

devversion force-pushed the fix-esm-forking branch from 8d97835 to ac0bcd1 Compare June 24, 2022 15:03

cspotcode added this to the 10.8.3 milestone Jul 2, 2022

cspotcode reviewed Jul 2, 2022

View reviewed changes

devversion force-pushed the fix-esm-forking branch from b10683d to 65fb22d Compare July 3, 2022 11:00

devversion commented Jul 3, 2022

View reviewed changes

devversion added 2 commits July 3, 2022 14:55

devversion force-pushed the fix-esm-forking branch from 65fb22d to d78e437 Compare July 3, 2022 14:55

cspotcode mentioned this pull request Jul 10, 2022

[META] v11 breaking changes #1505

Open

24 tasks

cspotcode linked an issue Jul 10, 2022 that may be closed by this pull request

Make --project accept path to directory containing tsconfig, not just path to tsconfig #1829

Closed

cspotcode removed a link to an issue Jul 10, 2022

Make --project accept path to directory containing tsconfig, not just path to tsconfig #1829

Closed

cspotcode mentioned this pull request Jul 12, 2022

remove cwd option, or at least stop resolving entrypoint relative to it #1834

Open

cspotcode added 2 commits July 12, 2022 14:21

changes based on review

38befcc

lint-fix

ad19d9f

cspotcode reviewed Jul 12, 2022

View reviewed changes

src/test/esm-loader.spec.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

cspotcode reviewed Jul 12, 2022

View reviewed changes

cspotcode added 6 commits July 12, 2022 19:30

enable transpileOnly in new tests for performance

e112f7c

Tweak basic working dir tests to verify that --cwd affects entrypoint…

112a47c

… resolution but not process.cwd()

update forking tests:

d52c0b5

disable non --esm test with comment about known bug and link to tickets make tests set cwd for fork() call, to be sure it is respected and not overridden by --cwd

use swc compiler to avoid issue with ancient TS versions not understa…

b7bcdcf

…nding import.meta.url syntax

Remove tests that I think are redundant (but I've asked for confirmat…

3d9e040

…ion in code review)

fix another issue with old TS

5164e2f

devversion mentioned this pull request Jul 13, 2022

Consistently perform bootstrap and encode Brotli config for improved caching and reduced code complexity #1836

Closed

final review updates

58ddc33

cspotcode merged commit 32d07e2 into TypeStrong:main Jul 13, 2022

sync-by-unito bot mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2022

build(deps-dev): bump ts-node from 10.2.1 to 10.9.1 numbersprotocol/capture-lite#1877

Open

GLOBAL-FINTECH mentioned this pull request May 24, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 10.3.0 to 10.9.2 GLOBAL-FINTECH/api#47

Open

YoutacRandS-VA mentioned this pull request Jun 19, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 8.10.1 to 10.9.2 YoutacRandS-VA/starter-workflows#3

Open

Odida mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 10.4.0 to 10.9.2 FEWS-NET/inf-node-gitlab-2-github#4

Open

OKEAMAH mentioned this pull request Aug 1, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 7.0.1 to 10.9.2 OKEAMAH/token-profile#4

Open

Tuskaroo mentioned this pull request Aug 26, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 10.8.1 to 10.9.2 Tuskaroo/kata-machine#4

Open

Mustafaovais mentioned this pull request Sep 22, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade: ts-node, typescript, web3-eth-abi Mustafaovais/wormhole#5

Open

snyk-io bot mentioned this pull request Sep 23, 2024

[Snyk] Upgrade ts-node from 7.0.1 to 10.9.2 SherfeyInv/token-profile#4

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix ESM node processes being unable to fork into other scripts #1814

Fix ESM node processes being unable to fork into other scripts #1814

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

codecov bot commented Jun 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

cspotcode commented Jun 24, 2022

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

devversion commented Jun 28, 2022

cspotcode Jul 2, 2022

devversion Jul 3, 2022

cspotcode Jul 3, 2022

cspotcode Jul 2, 2022

devversion Jul 3, 2022

cspotcode commented Jul 2, 2022

cspotcode Jul 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022

devversion Jul 3, 2022

cspotcode Jul 3, 2022

cspotcode Jul 3, 2022

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

cspotcode Jul 10, 2022

devversion Jul 10, 2022

cspotcode Jul 10, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion commented Jul 12, 2022

devversion commented Jul 12, 2022

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022 •

edited

Loading

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022

cspotcode Jul 12, 2022

devversion Jul 13, 2022

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022

cspotcode Jul 12, 2022

devversion Jul 13, 2022

cspotcode Jul 13, 2022

cspotcode commented Jul 13, 2022

devversion commented Jul 13, 2022

Fix ESM node processes being unable to fork into other scripts #1814

Fix ESM node processes being unable to fork into other scripts #1814

Conversation

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

codecov bot commented Jun 24, 2022 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

cspotcode commented Jun 24, 2022

devversion commented Jun 24, 2022

devversion commented Jun 28, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cspotcode commented Jul 2, 2022

cspotcode Jul 2, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

devversion Jul 3, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

devversion Jul 3, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cspotcode Jul 10, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

devversion Jul 3, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

devversion commented Jul 12, 2022

devversion commented Jul 12, 2022

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022 • edited Loading

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

cspotcode commented Jul 13, 2022

devversion commented Jul 13, 2022

codecov bot commented Jun 24, 2022 •

edited

Loading

cspotcode Jul 2, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

cspotcode Jul 10, 2022 •

edited

Loading

devversion Jul 3, 2022 •

edited

Loading

cspotcode commented Jul 12, 2022 •

edited

Loading