Change v3 deprecation message to warning.#3303
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR downgrades the severity of the CodeQL Action v3 deprecation notice from an error to a warning. The deprecation is scheduled for December 2026, and the message is intended to warn users in advance rather than indicate an immediate failure.
Key Changes:
- Changed
core.error()tocore.warning()for the v3 deprecation message - Updated the corresponding test to spy on
core.warninginstead ofcore.error - Added a changelog entry explaining the change
Reviewed Changes
Copilot reviewed 10 out of 16 changed files in this pull request and generated 43 comments.
Show a summary per file
| File | Description |
|---|---|
src/util.ts |
Changed deprecation message from error to warning level |
src/util.test.ts |
Updated test spy to monitor core.warning instead of core.error |
CHANGELOG.md |
Added entry documenting the severity downgrade |
package-lock.json |
Unrelated peer dependency changes (automatically generated) |
lib/*.js |
Generated JavaScript files reflecting the TypeScript changes |
| return error4 instanceof ConfigurationError ? "user-error" : "failure"; | ||
| function getActionsStatus(error3, otherFailureCause) { | ||
| if (error3 || otherFailureCause) { | ||
| return error3 instanceof ConfigurationError ? "user-error" : "failure"; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This expression will be implicitly converted from undefined to object.
| const flatResponse = (0, utils_js_1.flattenResponse)(rawResponse, operationSpec.responses[error4.statusCode] || operationSpec.responses["default"]); | ||
| error4.details = flatResponse; | ||
| } catch (error3) { | ||
| if (typeof error3 === "object" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.response)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| const flatResponse = (0, utils_js_1.flattenResponse)(rawResponse, operationSpec.responses[error4.statusCode] || operationSpec.responses["default"]); | ||
| error4.details = flatResponse; | ||
| } catch (error3) { | ||
| if (typeof error3 === "object" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.response)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| const flatResponse = (0, utils_js_1.flattenResponse)(rawResponse, operationSpec.responses[error4.statusCode] || operationSpec.responses["default"]); | ||
| error4.details = flatResponse; | ||
| } catch (error3) { | ||
| if (typeof error3 === "object" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.response)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if ((error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { | ||
| if ((error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| logger.info(`RetryPolicy: Network error ${retriableError} found, will retry.`); | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if ((error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { | ||
| if ((error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| logger.info(`RetryPolicy: Network error ${retriableError} found, will retry.`); | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if ((error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { | ||
| if ((error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| logger.info(`RetryPolicy: Network error ${retriableError} found, will retry.`); | ||
| return true; | ||
| } | ||
| } | ||
| if ((error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error4 === null || error4 === void 0 ? void 0 : error4.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { | ||
| if ((error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.code) === "PARSE_ERROR" && (error3 === null || error3 === void 0 ? void 0 : error3.message.startsWith(`Error "Error: Unclosed root tag`))) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This guard always evaluates to false.
| @@ -48838,24 +48838,24 @@ var require_dist_node15 = __commonJS({ | |||
| }); | |||
| module2.exports = __toCommonJS2(dist_src_exports); | |||
| var import_core = require_dist_node11(); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unused variable import_core.
| if (error4 || otherFailureCause) { | ||
| return error4 instanceof ConfigurationError ? "user-error" : "failure"; | ||
| function getActionsStatus(error3, otherFailureCause) { | ||
| if (error3 || otherFailureCause) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This expression always evaluates to false.
|
The failing check is because of this: Not sure how that could be related to this PR, though... 🤔 |
mbg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good if the tests pass. I restarted the one check that failed. Looks like it could be an intermittent problem.
I would remove the entry in the changelog for this though.
You also removed some options from the PR template that apply here. Let's talk about that elsewhere.
|
Yep, re-running the failed workflow worked. Not sure what went wrong and it's clearly intermittent, but as you observed, not related to this change. |
This reverts commit 023fd08.
Risk assessment
For internal use only. Please select the risk level of this change:
Which use cases does this change impact?
How did/will you validate this change?
.test.tsfiles).If something goes wrong after this change is released, what are the mitigation and rollback strategies?
How will you know if something goes wrong after this change is released?
Merge / deployment checklist