feat!: Support Node 18+ #2011
feat!: Support Node 18+ #2011
Conversation
tests/fixtures/nodejs_mono_repo_without_version/packages/no_version/package.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ cd .. | |||
| @rem we upgrade Node.js in the image: | |||
| SET PATH=%PATH%;/cygdrive/c/Program Files/nodejs/npm | |||
|
|
|||
| call nvm use v14.17.3 | |||
| call nvm use 18 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should install and use the latest version of Node 18
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's better to specify given we had that before, is there a reason you think it shouldn't be specified?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This would ensure the version tested has all of the latest bug fixes and features.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes but then we could potentially be installing on other versions which would make our testing unpredictable. Note our previous versions, which have all specified an exact version: #378
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see we have a pattern from previous iterations - however it doesn't necessarily mean it was best practice (even that linked PR suggests the same - the patch was a required manual update that we shouldn't have to do each time).
The stability for the oldest supported LTS is far less-likely to receive a bug or breaking change than a newer LTS, while taking advantage of any provided security patches. See the following:
- https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/doc/changelogs/CHANGELOG_V18.md
- https://github.com/nodejs/node/blob/main/doc/changelogs/CHANGELOG_V14.md
In short, we'd be preferring the problem of slight risk of a broken release vs getting pinged for manual security patching. I'd rather deal with the slight risk of a broken release as it would block releases across the ecosystem (all open source Node projects), which wouldn't make it a pressing matter for just us.
synthtool/gcp/templates/node_library/.kokoro/presubmit/node14/common.cfg
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
Please use this as a model if you have any other questions! https://github.com/googleapis/synthtool/pull/1825/files |
|
We'll want to follow up with a PR to update the Docker image dependencies once these are updated: https://github.com/googleapis/synthtool/blob/master/docker/owlbot/nodejs_mono_repo/Dockerfile#L55C1-L56C79 |
| @@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ cd .. | |||
| @rem we upgrade Node.js in the image: | |||
| SET PATH=%PATH%;/cygdrive/c/Program Files/nodejs/npm | |||
|
|
|||
| call nvm use v14.17.3 | |||
| call nvm use 18 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it's better to specify given we had that before, is there a reason you think it shouldn't be specified?
…o prepare-node-18
Adding support for Node 18+. Dropping older versions of Node.