Skip to content

Conversation

@JPeer264
Copy link
Member

closes #2985

This will ensure that in the future don't have to work around certain features which are not available in older Node versions.

@JPeer264 JPeer264 self-assigned this Nov 26, 2025
@JPeer264 JPeer264 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 26, 2025 11:11
@JPeer264 JPeer264 added the v3.0 Breaking changes to include in version 3.0.0 of Sentry CLI label Nov 26, 2025
@JPeer264 JPeer264 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 26, 2025 11:11
@JPeer264 JPeer264 requested review from AbhiPrasad and removed request for AbhiPrasad November 26, 2025 11:11
@andreiborza
Copy link
Member

Hm, don't think we can/should do this. The CLI is used by our bundler plugins which are used by our SDKs which still support node 18 🤔.

@JPeer264
Copy link
Member Author

Very good point @andreiborza - Node 18 is good as well

@JPeer264 JPeer264 changed the title chore: Drop Node <=18 support chore: Drop Node <18 support Nov 26, 2025
Copy link
Member

@andreiborza andreiborza left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You typod the node version in the win32-x64 json, otherwise LGTM.

Should the base branch be master tho? How are you and @szokeasaurusrex handling v3?

@szokeasaurusrex
Copy link
Member

@andreiborza I have a PR stack for the 3.0 major. Currently the top PR is #2973.

I see two options for how we handle this: either we can have a separate PR stack for the JS API changes, which we can merge together at the end. This could make sense as we hopefully will not have too many conflicts at the merge.

The other option is we add this PR to my stack. That avoids merge conflicts in the future. In that case, I would take over managing this PR's branch once we agree it is ready, as the PR stacking process requires a rebase/force push workflow.

Which would y'all prefer?

@andreiborza
Copy link
Member

@szokeasaurusrex I leave that up to you and @JPeer264, personally I'd add this to your stack.

Copy link
Member

@szokeasaurusrex szokeasaurusrex left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

@szokeasaurusrex
Copy link
Member

@JPeer264, I have added some suggestions. Once you have finalized your changes, please rebase on top of the v3 branch and resolve any conflicts. Once you are all done, please let me know, and I'll take over the branch and add it to my stack.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

v3.0 Breaking changes to include in version 3.0.0 of Sentry CLI

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Drop older Node versions

4 participants