Skip to content

Create a new pull request by comparing changes across two branches #513

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

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
Aug 6, 2020

Conversation

GulajavaMinistudio
Copy link

PR Checklist

Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:

PR Type

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Code style update (formatting, local variables)
  • Refactoring (no functional changes, no api changes)
  • Build related changes
  • CI related changes
  • Documentation content changes
  • angular.io application / infrastructure changes
  • Other... Please describe:

What is the current behavior?

Issue Number: N/A

What is the new behavior?

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • No

Other information

Zara Cooper and others added 11 commits August 5, 2020 10:52
Add missing comma  in structural directive section that made dash display incorrectly.

PR Close #38318
…ion (#38223)

The merge script currently accepts a configuration function that will
be invoked _only_ when the `ng-dev merge` command is executed. This
has been done that way because the merge tooling usually relies on
external requests to Git or NPM for constructing the branch configurations.

We do not want to perform these slow external queries on any `ng-dev` command
though, so this became a lazily invoked function.

This commit adds support for these configuration functions to run
asynchronously (by returning a Promise that will be awaited), so that
requests could also be made to the Github API. This is benefical as it
could avoid dependence on the local Git state and the HTTP requests
are more powerful/faster.

Additionally, in order to be able to perform Github API requests
with an authenticated instance, the merge tool will pass through
a `GithubClient` instance that uses the specified `--github-token`
(or from the environment). This ensures that all API requests use
the same `GithubClient` instance and can be authenticated (mitigating
potential rate limits).

PR Close #38223
…rget label (#38223)

The merge tool provides a way for configurations to determine the branches
for a label lazily. This is supported because it allows labels to respect
the currently selected base branch through the Github UI. e.g. if `target: label`
is applied on a PR and the PR is based on the patch branch, then the change
could only go into the selected target branch, while if it would be based on
`master`, the change would be cherry-picked to `master` too. This allows for
convenient back-porting of changes if they did not apply cleanly to the primary
development branch (`master`).

We want to expand this function so that it is possible to report failures if an
invalid target label is appplied (e.g. `target: major` not allowed in
some situations), or if the Github base branch is not valid for the given target
label (e.g. if `target: lts` is used, but it's not based on a LTS branch).

PR Close #38223
…tion (#38223)

Previously, each Angular repository had its own strategy/configuration
for merging pull requests and cherry-picking. We worked out a new
strategy for labeling/branching/versioning that should be the canonical
strategy for all actively maintained projects in the Angular organization.

This PR provides a `ng-dev` merge configuration that implements the
labeling/branching/merging as per the approved proposal.

See the following document for the proposal this commit is based on
for the merge script labeling/branching: https://docs.google.com/document/d/197kVillDwx-RZtSVOBtPb4BBIAw0E9RT3q3v6DZkykU

The merge tool label configuration can be conveniently accesed
within each `.ng-dev` configuration, and can also be extended
if there are special labels on individual projects. This is one
of the reasons why the labels are not directly built into the
merge script. The script should remain unopinionated and flexible.

The configuration is conceptually powerful enough to achieve the
procedures as outlined in the versioning/branching/labeling proposal.

PR Close #38223
…face (#38004)

The `TscPlugin` interface using a type of `ts.CompilerHost&Partial<UnifiedModulesHost>` for the `host` parameter
of the `wrapHost` method. However, prior to this change, the interface implementing `NgTscPlugin` class used a
type of `ts.CompilerHost&UnifiedModulesHost` for the parameter. This change corrects the inconsistency and
allows `UnifiedModulesHost` members to be optional when using the `NgtscPlugin`.

PR Close #38004
… RouterPreloader (#38344)

Previously, the `ngOnDestroy` method called `unsubscribe` regardless of if `subscription` had
been initialized.  This can lead to an error attempting to call `unsubscribe` of undefined.
This change prevents this error, and instead only attempts `unsubscribe` when the subscription
has been defined.

PR Close #38344
…n instantiated (#30246)

It is confusing when routes are successfully activated but a component
is not present on a page, with this message it's more clear.

PR Close #30246
Pre-empting code formatting changes when the
code is updated in a subsequent commit.

PR Close #30630
Some specialised browsers that do not support scroll restoration
(e.g. some web crawlers) do not allow `scrollRestoration` to be
writable.

We already sniff the browser to see if it has the `window.scrollTo`
method, so now we also check whether `window.history.scrollRestoration`
is writable too.

Fixes #30629

PR Close #30630
…8089)

This commit refactors the argument of the `parseEventName` function
to use an object with named properties instead of using an object indexer.

PR Close #38089
@GulajavaMinistudio GulajavaMinistudio merged commit 52a11e5 into TypescriptID:master Aug 6, 2020
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.

8 participants