pino@8.15.1 failures #988
Comments
|
I'll take a look asap. We are currently trying to nail down what behavior broke between v18 and v20 that causes all those. |
Closed
This was referenced Oct 3, 2023
ruyadorno
added a commit
to ruyadorno/citgm
that referenced
this issue
Oct 4, 2023
Marking `pino` as flaking since it's failing in many platforms for both `v18.x` and `v20.x` release lines. Refs: nodejs#988
|
I'm going to mark |
|
updated run that should fix the flaky test: https://ci.nodejs.org/view/Node.js-citgm/job/citgm-smoker/3305/ |
|
I think this is fixed. Let me know if there is anything else here. |
# for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
# to comment
Hi @mcollina I noticed you're listed as maintainer for pino so I'd like to bring to your attention that
pino@8.15.1tests have been failing inconsistently across different systems onv20.x. Feel free to loop in more contributors that you think may help.During the process of working on
v20.8.0I've observed it failing a bunch of times and it would be nice to have someone familiar with the code and its tests to take a look at what is possibly going on. Unfortunately I can't reproduce it locally on my macos machine so I have no more info to add.Here are a few failed citgm runs for reference:
v20.x: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/citgm-smoker/3269/v20.8.0-proposal: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/citgm-smoker/3279/v20.x (pino only run): https://ci.nodejs.org/job/citgm-smoker/3277/backport PR (pino only run): https://ci.nodejs.org/job/citgm-smoker/3278/The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: