-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.9k
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
chore(synthetics): add nodejs puppeteer 8 runtime #30851
Conversation
a1b3776
to
94c349c
Compare
* | ||
* @see https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudWatch/latest/monitoring/CloudWatch_Synthetics_Library_nodejs_puppeteer.html#CloudWatch_Synthetics_runtimeversion-nodejs-puppeteer-8.0 | ||
*/ | ||
public static readonly SYNTHETICS_NODEJS_PUPPETEER_8_0 = new Runtime('syn-nodejs-puppeteer-8.0', RuntimeFamily.NODEJS); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
will it not be better to have test(s) which utilise this enum for successful synthesis?
(note: not sure if it is possible to add such a test)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ChakshuGupta13
Thanks.
I've added a unit test and an integ test to verify deploying new runtime Canary.
* @see https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudWatch/latest/monitoring/CloudWatch_Synthetics_Library_nodejs_puppeteer.html#CloudWatch_Synthetics_runtimeversion-nodejs-puppeteer-6.1 | ||
* @see https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudWatch/latest/monitoring/CloudWatch_Synthetics_Library_nodejs_puppeteer.html#CloudWatch_Synthetics_runtimeversion-nodejs-puppeteer-6.2 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: this change, although necessary, may get hidden in history because it is being done with addition of Node.js puppeteer 8 runtime, hence, is it possible to take this separately (if not much effort required)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ChakshuGupta13
Thanks.
I've separated a PR #30853 to fix wrong link.
import * as cdk from 'aws-cdk-lib/core'; | ||
import { Canary, Cleanup, Code, Runtime, Schedule, Test } from 'aws-cdk-lib/aws-synthetics'; | ||
import { IntegTest } from '@aws-cdk/integ-tests-alpha'; | ||
const app = new cdk.App(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: an empty line between imports and logic will be better?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks. I've added.
Fix wrong link in syn-nodejs-puppeteer 6.2. I discovered this while working on #30851. I was [advised](#30851 (comment)) to separate the PRs, so I'm creating this as a new PR. ### Checklist - [x] My code adheres to the [CONTRIBUTING GUIDE](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md) and [DESIGN GUIDELINES](https://github.com/aws/aws-cdk/blob/main/docs/DESIGN_GUIDELINES.md) ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This looks great! Couple comments on organization.
- I appreciate the integ test, but I think we can roll it into the integ.canary.ts test. I do not think we need a full new test just for this runtime.
- On the unit test, I see the only version of puppeteer we use is 3.8 (which is long deprecated). Instead of the single new test, what happens if we update all the versions to 8.0. With any luck, everything works without hiccups! If not, we can reconsider.
44a337a
to
6db5212
Compare
@scanlonp
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nice work! Thanks for adding this in @mazyu36!
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
Nice I was waiting for this! |
@scanlonp |
Hey @mazyu36, that's saying we need 2 approvals for merge. It's a new process we are trying out. I'll see if I can get someone else to take a look at this and approve. I would not worry too much about it for now. Our next release will be next week, and I'll make sure this is in by then! |
@scanlonp |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from main and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
Comments on closed issues and PRs are hard for our team to see. If you need help, please open a new issue that references this one. |
Issue # (if applicable)
Closes #30850.
Reason for this change
Add new runtime
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonCloudWatch/latest/monitoring/CloudWatch_Synthetics_Library_nodejs_puppeteer.html#CloudWatch_Synthetics_runtimeversion-nodejs-puppeteer-8.0
Description of changes
Add new runtime
Description of how you validated changes
No test added because just add runtime enum.
Checklist
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license