Skip to content

👷(CLDSRV-860) Monitor async await migration#6088

Open
DarkIsDude wants to merge 12 commits intodevelopment/9.3from
feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration
Open

👷(CLDSRV-860) Monitor async await migration#6088
DarkIsDude wants to merge 12 commits intodevelopment/9.3from
feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration

Conversation

@DarkIsDude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude commented Feb 25, 2026

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude self-assigned this Feb 25, 2026
@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude changed the base branch from development/9.2 to development/9.3 February 25, 2026 15:48
@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@codecov

This comment was marked as resolved.

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude marked this pull request as ready for review March 10, 2026 16:09
@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude requested review from a team, benzekrimaha and delthas March 10, 2026 16:09
@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude force-pushed the feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration branch from 93020af to 8981239 Compare March 10, 2026 16:10
@claude

This comment was marked as resolved.

@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@bert-e

This comment was marked as resolved.

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude force-pushed the feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration branch from a64c535 to f1e7018 Compare March 19, 2026 13:23
@claude

This comment was marked as resolved.

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude force-pushed the feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration branch from 90e8107 to 84461c0 Compare April 13, 2026 12:43
@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 13, 2026

History mismatch

Merge commit #9dff1c59872a7482d6a5c79623a7025071f981f3 on the integration branch
w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration is merging a branch which is neither the current
branch feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration nor the development branch
development/9.4.

It is likely due to a rebase of the branch feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration and the
merge is not possible until all related w/* branches are deleted or updated.

Please use the reset command to have me reinitialize these branches.

The following options are set: approve

@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude bot commented Apr 13, 2026

LGTM

Review by Claude Code

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 13, 2026

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/7.10
  • development/7.4
  • development/7.70
  • development/8.8
  • development/9.0
  • development/9.1
  • development/9.2

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 13, 2026

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 15, 2026

Conflict

A conflict has been raised during the update of
integration branch w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration with contents from feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration
and development/9.4.

Please resolve the conflict on the integration branch (w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration).

Here are the steps to resolve this conflict:

 git fetch
 git checkout w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration
 git pull  # or "git reset --hard origin/w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration"
 git merge origin/development/9.4
 # <intense conflict resolution>
 git commit
 git merge origin/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration
 # <intense conflict resolution>
 git commit
 git push -u origin w/9.4/feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration

The following options are set: approve

package.json Outdated
"nan": "v2.22.0",
"fast-xml-parser": "^5.5.6"
"fast-xml-parser": "^5.5.6",
"brace-expansion": ">=5.0.5"
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The >=5.0.5 resolution is an unbounded semver range. If brace-expansion@6.0.0 ships with breaking changes, a future yarn install will pick it up automatically. Use ^5.0.5 to pin to the 5.x line while still getting patches.

```suggestion
"brace-expansion": "^5.0.5"

@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude bot commented Apr 15, 2026

  • brace-expansion resolution uses unbounded range >=5.0.5 — should be ^5.0.5 to prevent pulling in future major versions with breaking changes
    - Change to "brace-expansion": "^5.0.5"

    Review by Claude Code

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude force-pushed the feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration branch from cd5bfb2 to eb65dfb Compare April 15, 2026 11:24
package.json Outdated
"fast-xml-parser": "^5.5.6"
"fast-xml-parser": "^5.5.6",
"brace-expansion": "^5.0.5",
"picomatch": "^4.0.4"
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Forcing brace-expansion from v1/v2 to v5 and picomatch from v2 to v4 via global resolutions is risky. The yarn.lock shows brace-expansion@^1.1.7 now resolves to 5.0.5 and picomatch@^2.0.4 resolves to 4.0.4. Transitive dependencies like minimatch@3 (used by mocha, nyc, glob) expect brace-expansion@1 — a forced major bump can cause subtle runtime breakage.

These resolutions were likely added because ts-morph brings in minimatch@10 (needs brace-expansion@5) and tinyglobby (needs picomatch@4). But yarn should be able to install these as separate nested versions without a global resolution. Consider removing both resolutions and letting yarn deduplicate naturally.

— Claude Code


const propertyAccesses = sourceFile.getDescendantsOfKind(SyntaxKind.PropertyAccessExpression);
for (const access of propertyAccesses) {
if (access.getName() === 'then') {
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The .then() counter matches any property access named then, not just Promise chains. Objects like Sequelize queries, jQuery deferreds, or custom APIs with a .then method will inflate the count. For a migration tracker this is probably acceptable, but worth a comment noting the heuristic is imprecise.

— Claude Code

@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude bot commented Apr 15, 2026

  • Global resolutions for brace-expansion (v1→v5) and picomatch (v2→v4) force major version bumps on all transitive consumers. Packages like minimatch@3 (mocha, nyc, glob) expect brace-expansion@1 — this could cause runtime breakage. Remove the resolutions and let yarn install nested versions naturally.
    • See inline comment on package.json:93
  • The .then() counter in count-async-functions.mjs matches any .then property access, not just Promise chains. Acceptable for a rough metric but worth documenting.
    • See inline comment on count-async-functions.mjs:64

Review by Claude Code

@DarkIsDude DarkIsDude force-pushed the feature/CLDSRV-860/monitor-async-await-migration branch from eb65dfb to 4682684 Compare April 15, 2026 11:45
@claude
Copy link
Copy Markdown

claude bot commented Apr 15, 2026

LGTM

The PR adds solid tooling for monitoring async/await migration:
- CodeQL queries, diff checker, and codebase-wide counter are well-structured
- ESLint rules are correctly set to warn with CI overrides to avoid blocking on existing code
- execFileSync is properly used (no shell injection risk)
- Tests cover the key scenarios (no changes, non-source changes, callback violations)
- fetch-depth: 0 correctly added for the lint job to support diff-based checking

Review by Claude Code

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 15, 2026

Request integration branches

Waiting for integration branch creation to be requested by the user.

To request integration branches, please comment on this pull request with the following command:

/create_integration_branches

Alternatively, the /approve and /create_pull_requests commands will automatically
create the integration branches.

@DarkIsDude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/create_pull_requests

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 15, 2026

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/7.10
  • development/7.4
  • development/7.70
  • development/8.8
  • development/9.0
  • development/9.1
  • development/9.2

Follow integration pull requests if you would like to be notified of
build statuses by email.

The following options are set: create_pull_requests

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 15, 2026

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • 2 peers

The following options are set: create_pull_requests

@DarkIsDude
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

bert-e commented Apr 15, 2026

In the queue

The changeset has received all authorizations and has been added to the
relevant queue(s). The queue(s) will be merged in the target development
branch(es) as soon as builds have passed.

The changeset will be merged in:

  • ✔️ development/9.3

  • ✔️ development/9.4

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/7.10
  • development/7.4
  • development/7.70
  • development/8.8
  • development/9.0
  • development/9.1
  • development/9.2

There is no action required on your side. You will be notified here once
the changeset has been merged. In the unlikely event that the changeset
fails permanently on the queue, a member of the admin team will
contact you to help resolve the matter.

IMPORTANT

Please do not attempt to modify this pull request.

  • Any commit you add on the source branch will trigger a new cycle after the
    current queue is merged.
  • Any commit you add on one of the integration branches will be lost.

If you need this pull request to be removed from the queue, please contact a
member of the admin team now.

The following options are set: approve, create_pull_requests

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.

4 participants