Skip to content

[4.x] Fix Checks#1709

Open
JonPurvis wants to merge 3 commits into
pestphp:4.xfrom
JonPurvis:fix-checks
Open

[4.x] Fix Checks#1709
JonPurvis wants to merge 3 commits into
pestphp:4.xfrom
JonPurvis:fix-checks

Conversation

@JonPurvis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@JonPurvis JonPurvis commented May 16, 2026

What:

  • Bug Fix

Description:

After pest-plugin-browser was raised to ^4.3.1 (e766825f), PRs from branches not named 4.x fail at composer update because the root package is inferred as dev-<branch>, which does not satisfy pest ^4.4.5. Setting the root version unblocks CI for all PRs targeting 4.x.

pest-plugin-browser ^4.3.1 requires pestphp/pest ^4.4.5 on the root package.
Without an explicit version, Composer infers dev-<branch> on PR branches,
which fails composer update before tests run.
@JonPurvis JonPurvis changed the title Fix Checks [4.x] Fix Checks May 16, 2026
@JonPurvis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Hey @nunomaduro 👋

Does this change make sense to you? I noticed checks failing on my earlier PR and I believe this is the fix needed.

Comment thread composer.json Outdated
{
"name": "pestphp/pest",
"description": "The elegant PHP Testing Framework.",
"version": "4.7.0",
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

With this fix, we need to update the version here with each update, no?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, of course, open to other suggestions on how to fix this. But we should have running CI checks before merging PRs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I already fixed it in #1686

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thought of a better way of doing this actually

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ha, you're PR does what I was thinking 😆

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@MrPunyapal Given this PR is smaller and fixes this one thing, I think it makes sense to fast-track getting this branch merged and then you can update yours.

What do you think?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agree

@JonPurvis JonPurvis requested a review from MrPunyapal May 23, 2026 16:44
@JonPurvis
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

This will also need an approval by @nunomaduro

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.

2 participants