Skip to content

fix(client-test-version-utils): restore resolveRangeViaManifest behavior#27526

Open
jason-ha wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
jason-ha:test/version-utils/manifest-request-fixes
Open

fix(client-test-version-utils): restore resolveRangeViaManifest behavior#27526
jason-ha wants to merge 1 commit into
microsoft:mainfrom
jason-ha:test/version-utils/manifest-request-fixes

Conversation

@jason-ha

@jason-ha jason-ha commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cleanup from #27521 CI repair:

  • restore behavior of resolveRangeViaManifest to only allow version that is within manifest
  • update unit tests to check expectations
  • remove getRequestedVersion from package exports
  • require requested be specified when calling getRequestedVersion
  • add/correct various comments

Cleanup from #11082:

  • correct getRequestedVersion throwing test cases (that weren't checking error message content)
  • remove extraneous try-catch and wrap in calculateRequestedRange

Cleanup from microsoft#27521 CI repair:
- restore behavior of `resolveRangeViaManifest` to only allow version that is within manifest
- update unit tests to check expectations
- remove `getRequestedVersion` from package exports
- require `requested` be specified when calling `getRequestedVersion`
- add/correct various comments

Cleanup from microsoft#11082:
- correct `getRequestedVersion` throwing test cases (that weren't checking error message content)
- remove extraneous try-catch and wrap in `calculateRequestedRange`

Copilot AI left a comment

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.

Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Hi! Thank you for opening this PR. Want me to review it?

Based on the diff (110 lines, 3 files), I've queued these reviewers:

  • Correctness — logic errors, race conditions, lifecycle issues
  • Security — vulnerabilities, secret exposure, injection
  • API Compatibility — breaking changes, release tags, type design
  • Performance — algorithmic regressions, memory leaks
  • Testing — coverage gaps, hollow tests

How this works

  • Adjust the reviewer set by ticking/unticking boxes above. Reviewer toggles alone don't trigger anything.

  • Tick Start review below to dispatch the review fleet.

  • After review finishes, tick Start review again to request another run — it auto-resets after each dispatch.

  • This comment updates as new commits land; your reviewer selections are preserved.

  • Start review

Comment on lines +360 to +361
* If the value is a negative number, the base version will be adjusted down and returned.
* If the value is 0 or `undefined`, the base version will be returned as-is.

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.

Since -0 is a thing, and is a negative number, and usually considered equal to 0, and also might make sense in this code (to try and test against the most recent release, since -1 means previous beta break), we might need to clarify or rephrase this to be unambiguous on how -0 behaves.

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.

5 participants