Skip to content

fix: update splitAndAssert to allow for more than two split parts#2103

Open
ATGardner wants to merge 1 commit into
isomorphic-git:mainfrom
codefresh-io:fix-github-push
Open

fix: update splitAndAssert to allow for more than two split parts#2103
ATGardner wants to merge 1 commit into
isomorphic-git:mainfrom
codefresh-io:fix-github-push

Conversation

@ATGardner

Copy link
Copy Markdown

I'm fixing a bug or typo

  • if this is your first time contributing, run npm run add-contributor and follow the prompts to add yourself to the README
  • squash merge the PR with commit message "fix: [Description of fix]"

I'm adding a parameter to an existing command X:

  • add parameter to the function in src/api/X.js (and src/commands/X.js if necessary)
  • document the parameter in the JSDoc comment above the function
  • add a test case in __tests__/test-X.js if possible
  • if this is your first time contributing, run npm run add-contributor and follow the prompts to add yourself to the README

I'm adding a new command:

  • add as a new file in src/api (and src/commands if necessary)
  • add command to src/index.js
  • update __tests__/test-exports.js
  • create a test in src/__tests__
  • document the command with a JSDoc comment
  • add page to the Docs Sidebar website/sidebars.json
  • add page to the v1 Docs Sidebar website/versioned_sidebars/version-1.x-sidebars.json
  • if this is your first time contributing, run npm run add-contributor and follow the prompts to add yourself to the README
  • squash merge the PR with commit message "feat: Added 'X' command"

fixing the parsing of the capabilities request, due to a change in github.com response

@jcubic

jcubic commented May 27, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

It breaks unit tests.

@ATGardner

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Author

yeah, i was working on making a better fix, to have the unit tests pass + add a specific unit test to this case, but i understand github have fixed it on their side, so this pr can be closed.

@jcubic

jcubic commented May 28, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I've heard that they just rollback the recent changes. Maybe we should prepare for the future and make it future-proof. But first I would like to know exactly what was the reason for this change. Was it just an update of git server? There were other libraries that were affected.

I wish someone could answer this.

@manumbs

manumbs commented May 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@ATGardner GitHub didn't exactly "fix the problem", they just reverted the change introduced on the Git server (not communicated, by the way), as you can see here

The implementation suggested here should proceed because, at some point, these changes will likely be reverted by the GitHub team again.

@jcubic

jcubic commented May 29, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@manumbs do you know, by chance, what is the reason behind this change? Was it just up stream update of git server, or something done by GitHub?

I really would like to know what was the reason behind this. If this is just how the new git server works, and it's not a breaking change for the canonical git client. We need to add this to isomorphic-git. Another thing is that if there are more than one element, there are new data send from the server. Maybe we need to use it somehow.

Unfortunately, I lack knowledge of how the git protocol works.

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.

3 participants