Repository navigation
bump node version to 26.10.0 - #8509
Conversation
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
|
View your CI Pipeline Execution ↗ for commit 9148d37
☁️ Nx Cloud last updated this comment at |
🚀 Changeset Version PreviewNo changeset entries found. Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. |
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 1860ed494c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
| @@ -1 +1 @@ | |||
| 24.8.0 | |||
| 26.10.0 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
At this commit's September 26 timestamp, Node 26.10.0 has not been released, so nvm install or nvm use on a clean checkout cannot resolve the version and contributors cannot run the repository's mandated installation and validation flow. Pin the latest published Node 26 release or retain 24.8.0 instead.
AGENTS.md reference: AGENTS.md:L13-L13
Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
really? what about https://nodejs.org/en/download/current
|
Note Reviews pausedIt looks like this branch is under active development. To avoid overwhelming you with review comments due to an influx of new commits, CodeRabbit has automatically paused this review. You can configure this behavior by changing the
Use the following commands to manage reviews:
Use the checkboxes below for quick actions:
No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉 ℹ️ Recent review info
📝 Walkthrough
Merge Risk: ⚪ Minimal · up to
|
| Check name | Status | Explanation | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Docstring Coverage |  |
Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 2 functions across 45 files. (3 skipped: 3… | Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold. |
-
Check name Status Explanation Linked Issues check Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. Out of Scope Changes check Check skipped because no linked issues were found for this pull request. Title check The title clearly and concisely identifies the primary change: updating the Node.js version to 26.10.0. Description check The description explains the Node.js upgrade, workflow changes, validation results, release impact, and AI authorship. It does not reproduce the template headings or checklist, but it provides the req… Full details: Description check
-
Explanation
The description explains the Node.js upgrade, workflow changes, validation results, release impact, and AI authorship. It does not reproduce the template headings or checklist, but it provides the required information in equivalent sections.
-
Full details: Docstring Coverage
-
Explanation
Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%. Docstring coverage is scoped to functions touched by this diff. Analyzed 2 functions across 45 files. (3 skipped: 3 unsupported.)
Resolution
Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.
- Fix all pre-merge checks with AI
✨ Finishing Touches: 💡 1
-
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
-
- Commit to this branch
- Create a new PR
🛠️ Fix failing CI checks: 💡
- Commit to this branch
- Create a new PR
-
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.
Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.
![nx-cloud[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/80458?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Important
At least one additional CI pipeline execution has run since the conclusion below was written and it may no longer be applicable.
Nx Cloud is proposing a fix for your failed CI:
We believe this change will fix the failing test. Node 26.10.0 (bumped in this PR's .nvmrc) now exposes a global localStorage that resolves to undefined without a --localstorage-file flag, and Vitest's jsdom environment doesn't override this global, so window.localStorage in the test teardown throws Cannot read properties of undefined (reading 'clear'). Wrapping the cleanup call in try/catch mirrors the existing pattern already used in cache-replacement.test.ts for this same environment quirk.
Tip
✅ We verified this fix by re-running @tanstack/router-devtools-core:test:unit.
diff --git a/packages/router-devtools-core/tests/interpolation-navigation.test.ts b/packages/router-devtools-core/tests/interpolation-navigation.test.ts
index d756d1d5..57b57c57 100644
--- a/packages/router-devtools-core/tests/interpolation-navigation.test.ts
+++ b/packages/router-devtools-core/tests/interpolation-navigation.test.ts
@@ -85,6 +85,8 @@ test('offers navigation only when required and splat params are available', asyn
router.history.destroy()
navigate.mockRestore()
container.remove()
- window.localStorage.clear()
+ try {
+ window.localStorage.clear()
+ } catch {}
}
}, 30_000)
Or Apply changes locally with:
npx nx-cloud apply-locally hQuq-PAjZ
Apply fix locally with your editor ↗ View interactive diff ↗
🎓 Learn more about Self-Healing CI on nx.dev
Bundle Size BenchmarksThis pull request does not affect bundle size in any measured scenario. |
Merging this PR will improve performance by 2.34%
|
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn GET (vue) |
178.7 ms | 133.8 ms | +33.62% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn GET (react) |
178.1 ms | 133.4 ms | +33.53% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn GET (solid) |
179.9 ms | 134.8 ms | +33.43% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn raw-response (solid) |
147.7 ms | 117.6 ms | +25.58% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn raw-response (react) |
147.8 ms | 117.9 ms | +25.33% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn raw-response (vue) |
147.9 ms | 118.2 ms | +25.15% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn redirect (solid) |
168.5 ms | 138.4 ms | +21.68% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn redirect (vue) |
167.6 ms | 137.8 ms | +21.62% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn not-found (solid) |
229.5 ms | 189.7 ms | +20.98% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn not-found (vue) |
226.9 ms | 187.6 ms | +20.95% |
| ⚡ |
Simulation | ssr assets linked-css control (vue) |
432.3 ms | 357.4 ms | +20.95% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn redirect (react) |
174.2 ms | 144.4 ms | +20.65% |
| ⚡ |
Simulation | ssr server-fn not-found (react) |
226.7 ms | 188 ms | +20.62% |
| ⚡ | Memory | mem client unique-location-churn (vue) |
96.7 KB | 81.6 KB | +18.51% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn during document ssr (vue) |
394.3 ms | 333.7 ms | +18.14% |
| ⚡ |
Simulation | ssr server-fn send-context (react) |
211.7 ms | 180.9 ms | +17.03% |
| ⚡ |
Simulation | ssr server-fn send-context (solid) |
214.1 ms | 182.9 ms | +17.02% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr server-fn send-context (vue) |
212.2 ms | 181.5 ms | +16.91% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr request loop (vue) |
524.3 ms | 452.8 ms | +15.79% |
| ⚡ ℹ️ | Simulation | ssr assets inline-css cdn (vue) |
441.1 ms | 383.1 ms | +15.14% |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |
ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.
Tip
Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing bump-node-26.10.0 (9148d37) with main (caaf32d)
Footnotes
-
3 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
219c8a0 to
cc3aa0a
Compare
|
cc3aa0a to
9148d37
Compare
Bumps the repository's Node version (
.nvmrc) from 24.8.0 to 26.10.0.Changes
.nvmrc:24.8.0→26.10.0..github/workflows/client-nav-benchmarks.yml→.github/workflows/benchmarks.yml, since the workflow runs the client-nav, SSR and memory suites. The concurrency group and thegh workflow runcommands in the benchmark READMEs now use the new name..nvmrc, so Node upgrades get CodSpeed results.Moved to #8723
Earlier revisions of this PR also upgraded
@codspeed/vitest-pluginto 6, reworked the client-nav benchmark lifecycle hooks for CodSpeed 6, and passed--no-experimental-webstorageto therouter-devtools-coretest workers. Those changes are now onmainvia #8723 (Vitest 5,@codspeed/vitest-plugin6.0.1, per-bench fixture hooks; Vitest 5's jsdom environment handles Node's native Web Storage), so they were dropped here. The lockfile did not need changes.Validation (Node 26.10.0,
--skipNxCache)Run locally on the same four commits based on the pre-merge #8723 branch:
CI=1 pnpm install --frozen-lockfile: passes, lockfile unchanged.nx run-many --targets=test:unit,test:types,test:eslint --exclude='examples/**,e2e/**': 47 projects, all pass.CODSPEED_ENV=1 CODSPEED_RUNNER_MODE=<mode> WITH_INSTRUMENTATION=1 … test:perf:<fw> --excludeTaskDependencies): client-nav and ssr (simulation), memory-server and memory-client (memory), each for React, Solid and Vue, all pass.After rebasing onto
main(with #8723 merged),test:unit,test:typesandtest:eslintwere re-run for the same 47 projects: all pass.🤖 Generated with Claude Code