[CI] Quiet quickcheck i18n output #197871
Open
+10
−10
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…g happens in i18n_check
delanni
added
Team:Operations
|
Pinging @elastic/kibana-operations (Team:Operations) |
💚 Build Succeeded
Metrics [docs]
|
jbudz
reviewed
Oct 25, 2024
| @@ -131,13 +128,15 @@ run( | |||
| { | |||
| concurrent: false, | |||
| exitOnError: true, | |||
| renderer: process.env.CI ? 'verbose' : ('default' as any), | |||
| forceTTY: false, | |||
| renderer: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was the silent flag still needed if we just removed verbose logging?
TinaHeiligers
approved these changes
Oct 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
The i18n check spews out ~5k lines of log. This makes it difficult to spot any errors, or even break the check through some buffer issue.
This PR quiets output from i18n quick check, yet keeping the error outputs.
We've tested it in #194379, and locally (to see if we still see the errors) - it seems to have fixed errors from @pgayvallet 's case.