-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 358
New issue
Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? # to your account
Test against more relevant versions of node on Travis #251
Conversation
- allow for `node@unstable` failures - slightly quicker npm install
Waiting on nvm-sh/nvm#1053 for nightly installs.
Which of these compilers would be preferred? |
@JaKXz I'm cool with dropping |
@bcoe done. I'll leave the Travis warning about GCC compilers to you / the other maintainers if there's some preferred one necessary - or I can just add whichever you guys want. I don't know the differences well enough to make a substantial decision. |
- "stable" | ||
|
||
before_install: | ||
- "npm config set progress=false" |
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 this do anything? npm won't render a progress bar in Travis anyway.
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.
@novemberborn I think it does speed up install a bit, it definitely does locally... I don't think there's harm in having it on CI since like you said Travis doesn't render one anyway, but if there's even a slight benefit then it's worth it imho.
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.
I don't think there are any benefits for Travis (and I doubt whether there's significant ones locally). Best not to have invocations like this in the code, it'll only lead to more questions in the future.
Should leave |
@JaKXz thanks for entertaining our 🚲 🏠, will land this today :) |
@bcoe TBPH I don't mind at all because this is really a discussion |
@novemberborn this and the continuing discussion at npm/npm#11283 are why I suggest the |
@JaKXz easy enough to test; let's kick off a build with and without the setting, and look at the Travis benchmarks; there's a second count beside each step in the build. |
allow fornode@unstable
failuresnpm install