Skip to content

Conversation

@aduh95
Copy link
Contributor

@aduh95 aduh95 commented Feb 9, 2026

Description

Simplification that can land once nodejs/node#61757 have landed downstream

Validation

Related Issues

Check List

  • I have read the Contributing Guidelines and made commit messages that follow the guideline.
  • I have run node --run test and all tests passed.
  • I have check code formatting with node --run format & node --run lint.
  • I've covered new added functionality with unit tests if necessary.

@aduh95 aduh95 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 9, 2026 22:25
Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings February 9, 2026 22:25
@vercel
Copy link

vercel bot commented Feb 9, 2026

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
api-docs-tooling Ready Ready Preview Feb 9, 2026 10:25pm

Request Review

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 9, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 24 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 80.59%. Comparing base (2a4cbe3) to head (4d4e42a).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/utils/generators.mjs 0.00% 24 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #598      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.60%   80.59%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         126      126              
  Lines       12132    12134       +2     
  Branches      874      874              
==========================================
  Hits         9779     9779              
- Misses       2350     2352       +2     
  Partials        3        3              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

Simplifies legacyToJSON serialization logic used by the legacy JSON generators, including a dedicated output shape for the consolidated all.json payload.

Changes:

  • Add a nullish-api branch to emit all.json with a specific key order.
  • Simplify per-section JSON serialization by removing the previous api === 'report' ordering special-case while preserving the index-module modules omission.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copy link
Member

@avivkeller avivkeller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Once downstream is good, I think this function can be removed entirely, can it not?

Copy link
Member

@avivkeller avivkeller left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ahh, I see the PR linked is a new PR, not the tooling PR

Copy link
Member

@ovflowd ovflowd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

SGTM. Good to fast track

@ovflowd ovflowd added the fast track This PR can land before the typical review time, with a :+1: from collaborators label Feb 9, 2026
@ovflowd ovflowd merged commit 6ec9047 into main Feb 9, 2026
26 checks passed
@ovflowd ovflowd deleted the filter-out-keys branch February 9, 2026 22:52
@avivkeller
Copy link
Member

@ovflowd please wait for fast track approval, as this should not have landed yet

@ovflowd
Copy link
Member

ovflowd commented Feb 10, 2026

@ovflowd please wait for fast track approval, as this should not have landed yet

No? I approved the fast-track. Only author cannot self-approve fast-track.

@avivkeller
Copy link
Member

But this wasn't ready to land, it should've waited for another PR.

I know I'm guilty of self-approving fast tracks, but perhaps we should change that rule to require an extra approval?

@ovflowd
Copy link
Member

ovflowd commented Feb 10, 2026

But this wasn't ready to land, it should've waited for another PR.

I know I'm guilty of self-approving fast tracks, but perhaps we should change that rule to require an extra approval?

It wouldn't really have mattered, as ultimately the actual PR introducing doc-kit wouldn't be merged anyways.

@ovflowd
Copy link
Member

ovflowd commented Feb 10, 2026

But to answer this better, it's more that I didn't realize this PR was not ready to be merged 😅 (cc @avivkeller) a mark as draft or block label would have helped, that's my bad.

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

Labels

fast track This PR can land before the typical review time, with a :+1: from collaborators

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants