Skip to content
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

test:verbose script #20

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2018
Merged

test:verbose script #20

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2018

Conversation

brodycj
Copy link

@brodycj brodycj commented Dec 6, 2018

to run jest with --verbose flag

which is now used in .travis.yml

I am partly raising this to see if Travis CI works on PRs. I do not see Travis CI checkmarks in https://github.com/wollardj/node-simple-plist/commits/master.

Also it looks like the default branch of this project is develop, which does not have any commits since 2016.

@brodycj brodycj mentioned this pull request Dec 6, 2018
3 tasks
package.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
to run jest with --verbose flag

which is now used in .travis.yml
@brodycj brodycj changed the title verbose-test script test:verbose script Dec 9, 2018
@brodycj
Copy link
Author

brodycj commented Dec 9, 2018

I would like to add an "off-topic" comment that I am not personally a fan of git commit hooks. Maybe this makes me a bit "old fashioned" but I generally prefer to manually do the "npm test" step before committing. And if we would always use PRs to make functional changes, and check for green build before merging, then we should never have an issue with untested broken code on GitHub.

I use git commit --amend quite a bit to cleanup commit messages after committing code changes, in which case I do not find the git commit hook so helpful.

Of course I could use "--no-verify" to get around the git hook but I would rather avoid the use of this kind of a trick.

@wollardj wollardj merged commit dd93231 into wollardj:master Dec 9, 2018
@wollardj
Copy link
Owner

wollardj commented Dec 9, 2018

Yeah, I can understand that point of view. Of course you're right that the use of CI workflow makes the git commit hooks more of a belt-and-suspenders approach, but to me it's target is less about keeping PRs stable (that's what TravisCI is for), it's more about keeping individual commits stable.

This project is not a huge one, so it might be less of a concern here. But on larger projects it makes a little more sense to worry about commit-level stability. I'm very in-tune with my human nature to appreciate patterns so I go push the trivial tasks to autopilot and focus on the bigger picture. So with that in mind, I opted to go the same route that I would have taken for a larger project.

Thanks for the thoughts!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants