-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.9k
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
fix(query): remove engine validation for query #9271
Conversation
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
8 Skipped Deployments
|
|
||
[1] | ||
|
||
However, we don't get an error when we query |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Up to you since you're the one driving query
, but returning information that we know is incorrect feels off to me. Do we need to worry about panics down the line in query around assumptions that every task has a valid package and has valid task dependencies?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think it's necessary so people can use query to help refactor their repos into valid configurations for turbo. But yeah, we will have to watch out for panics. I have a larger plan to switch us to a compiler-y error model where we accumulate diagnostics and try to recover from errors as much as possible.
Description
We don't want to validate certain issues with graphs with
turbo query
, because it should be still usable even with an invalid graph.Testing Instructions
Added a test that shows that
turbo query
is tolerant of issues thatturbo run
is not.