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

feat(cli.rs): wait for dev URL to be reachable, exit if command fails #3358

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 8, 2022

Conversation

lucasfernog
Copy link
Member

What kind of change does this PR introduce?

  • Bugfix
  • Feature
  • Docs
  • New Binding issue #___
  • Code style update
  • Refactor
  • Build-related changes
  • Other, please describe:

Does this PR introduce a breaking change?

  • Yes, and the changes were approved in issue #___
  • No

Checklist

  • When resolving issues, they are referenced in the PR's title (e.g fix: remove a typo, closes #___, #___)
  • A change file is added if any packages will require a version bump due to this PR per the instructions in the readme.
  • I have added a convincing reason for adding this feature, if necessary

Other information

Related to #2813

@lucasfernog lucasfernog requested a review from a team as a code owner February 8, 2022 03:08
@lucasfernog lucasfernog requested a review from a team February 8, 2022 03:08
tooling/cli.rs/src/dev.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
}
};
let mut i = 0;
let sleep_interval = std::time::Duration::from_secs(5);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

5 seconds is too long, don't you think?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm tricky. With vite you don't even get into a second iteration, because it's too fast.
With webpack taking like 30 seconds it would get quite spammy with timeouts < 5secs.
Maybe reduce the timeout, but only log the message every x tries?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah I was mainly trying to reduce the spam, since some frameworks like Quasar can take a minute to build. i'll reduce the logging instead.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

pushed, let me know what you think

Copy link
Member

@amrbashir amrbashir left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM! I can't test the ghost process issue though (currently away) but I posted the steps to try and reproduce it in the other PR.

@lucasfernog
Copy link
Member Author

Yeah the ghost process is part of a separate investigation and PR.

@amrbashir
Copy link
Member

Okay, This PR is fine as is then.

@lucasfernog lucasfernog merged commit a2d5929 into next Feb 8, 2022
@lucasfernog lucasfernog deleted the feat/dev-server-improvements branch February 8, 2022 13:43
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