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.

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

Adding additional iojs flags #1730

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 7, 2015
Merged

Adding additional iojs flags #1730

merged 1 commit into from Jun 7, 2015

Conversation

ryedog
Copy link
Contributor

@ryedog ryedog commented Jun 7, 2015

also removing duplicate flags

adding additional iojs flags
@jbnicolai
Copy link

also removing duplicate flags

And sorting them alphabetically, I see - explaining the removals of non-duplicate lines in the diff.

👍 LGTM

jbnicolai pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 7, 2015
Adding additional iojs flags
@jbnicolai jbnicolai merged commit 2453716 into mochajs:master Jun 7, 2015
@boneskull
Copy link
Member

noooo

@boneskull
Copy link
Member

ok ok. it's just dangerous to reorder flags, but it looks like this won't break anything.

it's still something we shouldn't be doing, but that'll have to wait for v3

@jbnicolai
Copy link

But.. they're all part of the same fallthrough case :/

@boneskull
Copy link
Member

@jbnicolai I was referring to having two executables, which we shouldn't be doing. As far as reordering flags, we've had PRs break stuff because of it. I didn't look at the commit before I freaked out, which is something I unfortunately tend to do

@ryedog
Copy link
Contributor Author

ryedog commented Jun 8, 2015

@boneskull totally agree but in this case it didn't matter so figured alphabetizing would reduce the chance of other dupes making it back in. thanks for merging!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants