-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15.2k
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
Adopt Node@18 as the minimum supported version #5595
base: 5.0
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
I had been thinking about this last night after our meeting and I was thinking that we should get all the dependencies working as we expect first and then do this specific change last. Maybe I am over thinking it, but I really do think it will be valuable to point specifically to the commits we landed which "broke" each node.js version. If we stop testing and do this early we loose that signal and it might be hard to untangle after the fact. |
AFAIK, there is no rush to merge this PR. It can be the last one before we officially release v5. Let's keep it open for a while and see how do we feel about it in few more commits 👍 |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
We can remove them in an ad-hoc way. That is sort of why I am not sure this specific PR would be what we even land, but I don't see any reason not to keep it open for now until we are sure. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
So I think maybe the docs have gotten a bit ahead of ourselves here as we say 5.x requires Node 18+ ... IIUC I think we do SUPPORT v18+ but technically we require a lower version. I probably changed this wording because I thought this was decided, my bad. Probably not a huge deal since anyone who's using 5 has sorted this out... but if this isn't going to land soon, then should we say something different to be accurate? |
I recommend to do it now, @UlisesGascon . |
Cool, glad my idea made some sense lol. I just want to know when we break it even if it is only the first break since that is all around better than not knowing 😄 EDIT: to clarify a bit on top of what @ctcpip said, the idea I had was that we would be able to tell exactly what commit broke people in this complicated and intertwined web of packages. If we cannot figure out which version broke a specific node version it means we just have a more difficult time tracking it down if necessary. This is not a blocker, but it could be useful in the future. Again, this should not stop us from just landing this change, just context to be aware of. So my earlier statement stands, if this is not a draft anymore and we have the approvals, we should just land it and move forward. |
Amazing! When do we start doing that, @wesleytodd ? |
This PR is not a draft anymore, feel free to merge it when you are ready @wesleytodd |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
.github/workflows/legacy.yml
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,182 @@ | |||
name: ci |
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.
Can we change the name of this to legacy? And maybe also the names of the individual stages as well?
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.
whoops. missed that
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.
does it look ok now?
Great addition! We can still tell when CI fails but it does not block! I only made one comment but then yeah I think we should land this! |
the change also unpins the node minor versions, something we previously agreed to... and I see that is now causing 21 to fail with our favorite query issue. probably solved with a rebase. checking |
|
based on the CI output, should we skip this tests in 21? Due the known QUERY issue. |
This is what @ctcpip was hoping to fix with merging the 4.x branch which has a change to skip that |
This comment was marked as spam.
This comment was marked as spam.
This PR is now closed as #5803 was merged including this change 🥳 |
reopened. I think some wires got crossed here |
we wanted these changes in the master->5.0 merge branch/PR, so we pulled them in. therefore, merging that PR will resolve this one. edit: converting this to draft so we don't accidentally merge it, but all the commits here have been pulled into the merge branch |
This PR is needed to remove the redundant pipelines that are still running and failing in the express/.github/workflows/ci.yml Line 13 in 9c756b0
Without it you will keep having a yearly supply of red crosses in every PR targeting |
As discussed in expressjs/discussions#224 and expressjs/discussions#196.
Here is a proposal to set Node@18 as the minimum version supported by Express v5.x
Main Changes
package.json
(4b3b8cc)Changelog