Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

WIP - Babel 6 #221

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

WIP - Babel 6 #221

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor

See #212 for an earlier PR.

Blocking issue is:
babel/babel#2954

I have to rely on babel-polyfill to get tests to pass until that is taken care of.

@sindresorhus sindresorhus added this to the 0.6.0 milestone Nov 16, 2015
@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

Relevant: babel/babel#3094

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

Blocking issue is: babel/babel#2954

Is this still blocking? Would you mind updating the link? I have no idea what issue on the new issue tracker it is.

@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ugh, why did they do that!

I looked and can't find the original issue in the new tracker.

I will look into this later today.

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

They were fed up with GitHub being non-responsive on improving the issue system and they needed something more powerful.

If it helps, the issue title were: (0 , _typeof3.default) is not a function

@jamiebuilds
Copy link
Contributor

It's the same issue number. https://phabricator.babeljs.io/T2954 which was closed as a duplicate of https://phabricator.babeljs.io/T6644

@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

Yeah, I searched for that and did not find

They have released a couple runtimes since, so probably the easiest option is for me to try again. Won't take me long. Just has to happen after work.

Thanks @thejameskyle

@jamestalmage jamestalmage mentioned this pull request Nov 20, 2015
Closed
@sindresorhus sindresorhus modified the milestones: 0.6.0, 0.7.0 Nov 24, 2015
@sindresorhus sindresorhus modified the milestones: 0.7.0, 0.8.0 Nov 30, 2015
@radiovisual radiovisual mentioned this pull request Nov 30, 2015
Closed
@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

Looks like there is a pending PR to fix our blocking issue.

sindresorhus
sindresorhus reviewed Dec 4, 2015
View reviewed changes
lib/babel.js
@@ -13,7 +12,7 @@ var testPath = process.argv[2];
var babel;

try {
var localBabel = resolveFrom('.', 'babel-core') || resolveFrom('.', 'babel');
var localBabel = resolveFrom('.', 'babel-core');
babel = require(localBabel);
} catch (err) {
babel = require('babel-core');
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should drop using the the user's local Babel version. Instead we should just document that to use npm@3 or npm deduplicate. The user can then just enforce any Babel 6 version and we will use the same since our dependency is loose.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree.

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

Another take on fixing the issue => babel/babel#3142

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

I believe this is also blocking => babel/babel#3139

@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

I believe this is also blocking => babel/babel#3139

No, shouldn't be. nyc already works around it. Babel's hook is perfectly fine if installed first. nyc has a solution in place that allows that allows the babel hook to be installed second, after nyc (but breaks if further hooks are installed).

capture-require will solve that for them, but it wreaks havoc on their test suite. capture-require can be used multiple times without breaking previous hooks. Their current test suite relies on the fact that nyc.wrapRequire() breaks the previously installed hook. That is basically fixed, just need to get some consensus around it.

@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

Another take on fixing the issue => babel/babel#3142

Yeah, I think that's the one that will land

@sindresorhus
Copy link
Member

Oh ok, that's great. So as soon as the Babel issue is fixed we can upgrade then.

@jamestalmage jamestalmage mentioned this pull request Dec 15, 2015
Closed
@jamestalmage
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing in favor of #333

There is only one concern mentioned here that still applies, and I have transferred that to the new PR.

jamestalmage added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 22, 2015
@jamestalmage @sindresorhus
Close #333 PR: Upgrade to Babel 6. Fixes #221, Fixes #148, Fixes #148
9c32200
@jamestalmage jamestalmage deleted the use-babel-6 branch April 6, 2016 22:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@jamestalmage @sindresorhus @jamiebuilds @vadimdemedes