-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
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
Revert 9.x events changes #18942
Revert 9.x events changes #18942
Conversation
Isn’t it, like, pretty trivial to just add back |
@@ -31,6 +32,9 @@ module.exports = EventEmitter; | |||
// Backwards-compat with node 0.10.x | |||
EventEmitter.EventEmitter = EventEmitter; | |||
|
|||
EventEmitter.usingDomains = false; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To be clear, I’m basically suggesting only taking this line of the diff, and leaving the rest alone
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm open to that as well, wasn't sure the context or why that line was removed. Should we add that line back to master instead?
Would doing another release next tuesday make sense then or should we get this out asap
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@MylesBorins I guess it seems fair to remove the line because it would be false-y by default anyway, so explicitly setting it here and thereby leaking domains logic into this module seems undesirable.
Would doing another release next tuesday make sense then or should we get this out asap
It’s not really all that clear to me just how breaking this change is or how many people it would affect – but if we’re only adding this line back, I don’t see a reason not to do a release as soon as we can.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok opening a PR
+1 to @addaleax 's suggestion. |
+1 on @addaleax |
It appears that 3ae5cf2 may have been Semver-Major as it broke the following code sample
This PR reverts 3ae5cf2 and the two commits that were backported along side of it 28edc1d and 35471bc
We should likely get a new release out of the door asasp
/cc @watson