chore(prlint): ban 'breaking changes' clause on stable modules #14861
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
|
nija-at
changed the title
added 2 commits
May 25, 2021 13:39
Testing
|
NetaNir
previously requested changes
May 25, 2021
tools/prlint/module.ts
Outdated
| const modules: string[] = []; | ||
|
|
||
| export function findModulePath(fuzz: string): string { | ||
| if (modules.length === 0) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can we extract this findAllModules into a separate function that will be called once (outside of the map) in assertStability?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why? It's run once now, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Simply for code cleanliness and avoiding a global variable
added 2 commits
May 27, 2021 15:10
nija-at
force-pushed
the
nija-at/ban-breaking-changes
branch
from
b7f3a9c
to
89f1649
Compare
rix0rrr
reviewed
May 28, 2021
|
|
||
| function discoverModules() { | ||
| if (modules.length === 0) { | ||
| if (!process.env.REPO_ROOT) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I personally don't see why we couldn't just default to CWD, but I'm fine with this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I will still need some way to configure this for unit tests.
rix0rrr
approved these changes
May 28, 2021
|
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
hollanddd
pushed a commit
to hollanddd/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 26, 2021
…4861) The `scripts/check-api-compatibility.sh` script prevents breaking API changes in stable CDK modules. However, this does not prevent functional breaking changes. It is infeasible to actually detect and prevent this. The CDK must be more strict on preventing such changes and the impact due to their perception. A linter error when a 'BREAKING CHANGE' clause for a stable module is encountered in the PR is a good way to communicate this information.
mergify bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 21, 2021
…18102) This PR introduces a proposed new label, `pr-linter/exempt-breaking-change` that, when added, circumvents the check that asserts stable modules do not have breaking changes. Motivation: A situation like #18027 where we have are willing to accept a functional breaking change to a stable module. The regular `allowed-breaking-changes.txt` file does not work here, since there is no breaking change to the API. We want to be able to document the breaking change, but by documenting we alert `prlint` that we are breaking a stable module. Counterargument: Functional breaking changes were explicitly banned in #14861. From the PR description: "The CDK must be more strict on preventing such changes and the impact due to their perception." I also added some "manual linting" to the file myself since it was bothering me, and now it muddies the diff. Sorry! ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
TikiTDO
pushed a commit
to TikiTDO/aws-cdk
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 21, 2022
…ws#18102) This PR introduces a proposed new label, `pr-linter/exempt-breaking-change` that, when added, circumvents the check that asserts stable modules do not have breaking changes. Motivation: A situation like aws#18027 where we have are willing to accept a functional breaking change to a stable module. The regular `allowed-breaking-changes.txt` file does not work here, since there is no breaking change to the API. We want to be able to document the breaking change, but by documenting we alert `prlint` that we are breaking a stable module. Counterargument: Functional breaking changes were explicitly banned in aws#14861. From the PR description: "The CDK must be more strict on preventing such changes and the impact due to their perception." I also added some "manual linting" to the file myself since it was bothering me, and now it muddies the diff. Sorry! ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The
scripts/check-api-compatibility.shscript prevents breaking APIchanges in stable CDK modules.
However, this does not prevent functional breaking changes. It is
infeasible to actually detect and prevent this.
The CDK must be more strict on preventing such changes and the impact
due to their perception.
A linter error when a 'BREAKING CHANGE' clause for a stable module is
encountered in the PR is a good way to communicate this information.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license