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

Review semver-minor backports #228

Closed
gibfahn opened this Issue Jun 7, 2017 · 9 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@gibfahn
Member

gibfahn commented Jun 7, 2017

I know it's a bit early, but it's probably worth starting to accumulate the list of PRs for which a backport to Node 6 has been requested (as the first one has been requested).

  • Previous Issue: #188
  • Command: branch-diff --reverse --filter-release --require-label=semver-minor --exclude-label=semver-major,meta,dont-land-on-v6.x,backport-requested-to-v6.x up/v6.x up/v8.x

Unsorted

  • http: overridable keep-alive behavior of Agent #13005
  • src: allow CLI args in env with NODE_OPTIONS #12677
  • assert.fail() accept a single argument or two arguments #12293
  • [1ee38eb874] - (SEMVER-MINOR) util: add %i and %f formatting specifiers ( Roman Reiss) #10308
  • [75f4329e01] - (SEMVER-MINOR) crypto: add randomFill and randomFillSync ( Evan Lucas) #10209
  • [4fb27d43f0] - intl: Add more versions from ICU ( Steven R. Loomis) nodejs/node#9266
  • crypto: add sign/verify support for RSASSA-PSS #11705
  • inspector: enable --inspect-brk in v6 #12615

Yes

Manual

@sam-github

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@sam-github
Member

sam-github commented Jun 8, 2017

What about nodejs/node#12677 (comment) ?

@gibfahn

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@gibfahn

gibfahn Jun 8, 2017

Member

What about nodejs/node#12677 (comment) ?

Yep, added.

This is a collaborative list, so if you want to add stuff just do it. These are just semver-minors we should look at, no consensus is necessary to add one to the list.

Member

gibfahn commented Jun 8, 2017

What about nodejs/node#12677 (comment) ?

Yep, added.

This is a collaborative list, so if you want to add stuff just do it. These are just semver-minors we should look at, no consensus is necessary to add one to the list.

@gibfahn gibfahn referenced this issue Jun 13, 2017

Closed

Auditing for 6.11.1 #230

2 of 3 tasks complete

@gibfahn gibfahn referenced this issue Jul 22, 2017

Closed

inspector: enable --inspect-brk in v6 #12615

0 of 3 tasks complete
@refack

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@refack

refack Jul 22, 2017

Member

Backported by mistake, so for your consideration: nodejs/node#14427

Member

refack commented Jul 22, 2017

Backported by mistake, so for your consideration: nodejs/node#14427

@srl295

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@srl295

srl295 Aug 31, 2017

Member

add more ICU versions - yes, this would be good

Member

srl295 commented Aug 31, 2017

add more ICU versions - yes, this would be good

@MylesBorins

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MylesBorins
Member

MylesBorins commented Sep 19, 2017

@Fishrock123

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Fishrock123

Fishrock123 Nov 20, 2017

Member

We (NodeSource) would like to have access to process.ppid in LTS branches - nodejs/node#16839

It requires a libuv upgrade, so we will have to see if that is feasible. If not, I imagine the backport of that particular feature would not be overly complex.

Member

Fishrock123 commented Nov 20, 2017

We (NodeSource) would like to have access to process.ppid in LTS branches - nodejs/node#16839

It requires a libuv upgrade, so we will have to see if that is feasible. If not, I imagine the backport of that particular feature would not be overly complex.

@cjihrig

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@cjihrig

cjihrig Nov 20, 2017

Contributor

FWIW, the libuv 1.x release line should continue to be backport-able.

Contributor

cjihrig commented Nov 20, 2017

FWIW, the libuv 1.x release line should continue to be backport-able.

@MylesBorins

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@MylesBorins

MylesBorins Nov 20, 2017

Member

@Fishrock123 which version of libuv? We updated v6.x and v8.x to 1.15.0 in the last minor

There is room for a minor on 6.x and 8.x in February if we want to do it... I would say this isn't likely to land on 4.x though

Member

MylesBorins commented Nov 20, 2017

@Fishrock123 which version of libuv? We updated v6.x and v8.x to 1.15.0 in the last minor

There is room for a minor on 6.x and 8.x in February if we want to do it... I would say this isn't likely to land on 4.x though

@Fishrock123

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@Fishrock123

Fishrock123 Nov 24, 2017

Member

From the PR:

depends on the libuv 1.16.0 update

Member

Fishrock123 commented Nov 24, 2017

From the PR:

depends on the libuv 1.16.0 update

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment