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

fix: Do not overwrite node's process object #241

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

gatzjames
Copy link

Hey 👋
Had an issue with the process object overwrite and thought to create a PR if it makes sense.

Closes #240

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 24, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #241 into master will decrease coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #241      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.72%   98.69%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files           2        2              
  Lines         157      153       -4     
  Branches       38       38              
==========================================
- Hits          155      151       -4     
  Misses          2        2              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/index.js 98.36% <ø> (-0.06%) ⬇️
index.js 98.91% <0.00%> (-0.03%) ⬇️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 7749894...c4a7057. Read the comment docs.

@semoal
Copy link

semoal commented Sep 28, 2020

This should be tested to avoid another regression with this, actually some of my actual work codebases are broken

@gatzjames
Copy link
Author

@semoal not sure how to test this, would probably need to run some e2e test with webpack to make it happen.
Also not sure if this actually fixes the issue correctly? Not very keen with how webpack 5 will work and the reason behind this change tbh.

@mrsteele
Copy link
Owner

This was actually done as part of the last release (didn't see this PR till just now). Sorry about that.

@mrsteele mrsteele closed this Oct 19, 2020
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.

🐓 [bug] after update to v2 -> v3 "SyntaxError: Unexpected token '.'"
3 participants