Closed ekohl closed 1 year ago
Puppetfiles
.These results were generated with Rangefinder, a tool that helps predict the downstream impact of breaking changes to elements used in Puppet modules. You can run this on the command line to get a full report.
Exact matches are those that we can positively identify via namespace and the declaring modules' metadata. Non-namespaced items, such as Puppet 3.x functions, will always be reported as near matches only.
Hey @ekohl, it looks like the PR is generating a block of failures in the CI. I dont think we can merge this while in this state. Also, we are planning to merge the Puppet 8 update to main very soon (today/tomorrow morning, you are welcome to leave a review if you want), so this PR will need a rebase to ensure that CI covers testing properly.
I will try to investigate this issue again as well, to see if I can figure out whats going on or why CI is not failing on main despite .exists?
being present there.
That looks very suspicious, but I can't explain why it happens. I don't have time to investigate it now so feel free to take over if you have the cycles.
@ekohl Sure thing, I'll rebase the PR and play around with for a bit to see if I can figure out a reason for these failures.
I rebased it myself because I suspect the merge commit tripped up the CLA check.
The mocked tests seems to "hide" the original code. Allowing all calls to File#exist?
and calling the original seems to fix the issue.
I was looking into this yesterday. Looks like I was getting close to the solution but I couldnt quite figure out exactly how to fix it. Anyways, happy to merge this now.
The mocked tests seems to "hide" the original code. Allowing all calls to
File#exist?
and calling the original seems to fix the issue.
That was also one of my suspicions, but was too busy with other work. Thanks @smortex!
In 7999ff2aebbd2d85a231318f1e466b36d6dab84e the cops were disabled, but Ruby 3.2 has removed the method.
Fixes #1354