Skip to content

Fix incorrect check if CI variable is set to true #2501

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
Timer merged 2 commits into from
Jun 19, 2017
Merged

Fix incorrect check if CI variable is set to true #2501

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
462e5d3
Fix incorrect check if CI variable is set to true
varnav Jun 8, 2017
3f5a625
Check for "not false" instead of "not true"
varnav Jun 8, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion packages/react-scripts/scripts/build.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -112,7 +112,7 @@ function build(previousFileSizes) {
if (messages.errors.length) {
return reject(new Error(messages.errors.join('\n\n')));
}
if (process.env.CI && messages.warnings.length) {
if (process.env.CI && process.env.CI.toLowerCase() === 'true' && messages.warnings.length) {
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Timer Timer Jun 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have a feeling people might set this to things like travis, etc.

How about checking !== 'false'?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@varnav varnav Jun 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm not sure about real practice of using this variable, I think we need some discussion first.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Timer Timer Jun 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Given the way it works currently (truthy), using !== false would retain current functionality and wouldn't be a breaking change (if you consider 'false' a bug).

Even if 'true' is the proper value to evaluate against, we would have to postpone that to 2.0.0.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@varnav varnav Jun 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, I agree then.

console.log(
chalk.yellow(
'\nTreating warnings as errors because process.env.CI = true.\n' +
Expand Down
⚡