-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 452
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
[2.0] Merge master differences in 2.x branch #526
Conversation
@@ -4,11 +4,9 @@ php: | |||
- 5.6 | |||
- 7.0 | |||
- 7.1 | |||
- nightly |
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.
You should not delete nightly
version. It is not 7.2
, it is current dev
version, so now it is 7.3
. We always should know how our code running on new version of PHP
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 disagree. 7.3 is now very far from being usable, and Travis will tag it while in beta stage, so we can add it at that point. (which will be in at least 8-9 months in the future from now).
Done! No longer WIP, please review! |
.scrutinizer.yml
Outdated
@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ tools: | |||
php_code_coverage: true | |||
external_code_coverage: | |||
timeout: 2400 # There can be another pull request in progress | |||
runs: 3 # PHP 5.6 + PHP 7.0 + PHP 7.1 | |||
runs: 3 # PHP 5.6 + PHP 7.0 + PHP 7.1 + PHP 7.2 |
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.
Shouldn't this be 4? According to the comment and the count of the option it was 3 before adding PHP 7.2
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.
Yep, that's right!! Fixing it now
@@ -239,14 +252,14 @@ In the following example, we'll use a middleware: | |||
public function handle($request, Closure $next) | |||
{ | |||
if (app()->bound('sentry')) { | |||
/** @var \Raven\Client $sentry */ | |||
/** @var \Raven_Client $sentry */ |
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 think it is a mistake
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.
Yep it is! Fixing it, thanks for spotting it!
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.
Umh... Wait a minute... It's like that because I copy-pasted from master, but simply replacing that may not work... The docs need to be fully updated to how the 2.x client will work, so maybe we can postpone that to a later PR... Also, @stayallive knows that Laravel integration way better than me!
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.
Will for sure take a look at this very soon!
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've resolved conficts. Can we merge this now? I (and @ste93cry too I believe) would like to resolve the docs issues for the 2.0 in a separate PR |
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.
Looks good. Will look at the docs separately.
Erm, maybe we should wait until tests are completed successfully? |
I did a mistake during the merge, it should be green now! |
I've merged more stuff from master in this PR, it's now up to date. @nokitakaze can you approve this? I wouldn't like to have more conflicts to solve here... |
@Jean85 what about leaving this PR open until 2.x is ready to be released in alpha so that we can track the differences between the this branch and master? I know it would be difficult to fix conflicts, but maybe it's better to do it one time for all |
It's not too difficult, the pain could be that we would be having PRs targeting wrong stuff or missing regression tests that we already have in here. I can easily reopen a new PR like this one to start tracking new differences and merge it later, but this is already big IMO. |
This PR is intended to port all differences from 1.x to 2.x, so we do not regress on bugs and stuff in the new release. This is a recap of what I've covered so far, with all PR that we merged in master and not on 2.x:
Last master commit merged into 2.0: a997764
sentry-php/tests/StacktraceTest.php
Line 231 in 873ab3c
sentry-php/tests/Processor/SanitizeDataProcessorTest.php
Lines 47 to 51 in 873ab3c
sentry-php/lib/Raven/Stacktrace.php
Line 227 in 873ab3c
excluded_app_paths
(ported with aad776d)sentry-php/lib/Raven/Stacktrace.php
Lines 367 to 372 in 873ab3c
sentry-php/composer.json
Lines 35 to 37 in 873ab3c