Antoine du Hamel
Antoine du Hamel
I mean, not showing the correct line is indeed something we should try to fix (but IMO not blocking). However, I think a more problematic behavior is to report `REPLACEME`...
> an you fix the commit message? I don't think the commit message needs fixing, it's the bot that is wrong.
There are conflicts to fix, as well as some comments to address here
> I feel that the above output you got is because Spawning childs may run like a CJS script while in module it is asynchronous. > Put the above code...
As I said earlier, it would be wrong to use "is the source parsed as ESM/CJS" as a confounding variable for how those functions would behave. The exact same functions...
It’s always been the case, and I think it aligns with our rules defined in `docs/contributing`. The CQ will refuse to land a PR that had commits pushed to it...
> If there is one review after the last force push, then CQ will merge it, right? That's correct. > I think it's still open to abuse What abuse do...
> @aduh95 For example: I force pushed, nobody reviewed it, and it still got merged by CQ. (Reference: [nodejs/node#46904](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/46904)) I think that’s definitely a bug. Note that Jacob did review...
> If person X opens a pull-request and receive 2+ reviews (from Y and Z), he could force-push couple of hours before the 48 hour window. Why would force-pushing be...
Should we close this as Won't fix? It seems most folks are happy to be listed as an approver wether or not there was a force-push, and as said above...