build: use node 14 or higher

[Kikobeats]

The main point of this PR is

• Avoid to maintained out of LTS node builds
• Remove monkey patch code (String.prototype.startsWith) since is not more necessary
• Reduce code using util.promisify

[codecov-io]

Codecov Report

Merging #12 (7feeed7) into master (61a4c36) will decrease coverage by 1.03%.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master      #12      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   86.95%   85.92%   -1.04%     
==========================================
  Files           6        6              
  Lines         138      135       -3     
==========================================
- Hits          120      116       -4     
- Misses         18       19       +1     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
lib/get.js	81.81% <ø> (-9.10%)	⬇️
index.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/bin.js	78.26% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/pidtree.js	89.36% <100.00%> (ø)

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 138eb22...210b9bd. Read the comment docs.

[huan]

LGTM

[Kikobeats]

not sure why windows builds are failing, probably is related to a thing not related to this PR 🤔

[simonepri]

Thanks for contributing!

At the moment this DLGTM.
I think is appropriate to bump the package to a stable before dropping support for node 0.10 (altough we don't have the CI testing it, it is still supported).

Before doing this though, I need to improve the CI and find a way to test on more OS than we currently do (maybe using a mixure of vagrant and docker, suggestions welcome).

[Kikobeats]

@simonepri I agree, right now CI build is a problem.

What if we delay this to be shipped under 1.0.0 version?

Then both things could be done: If you need to use Node 10 or lower, use 0.x, otherwise 1.x is for you.

[simonepri]

Yes that's exactly the plan!

The PR per se looks good, it is just that some other work needs to be done before this can be merged.

[huan]

@simonepri I have merged the #14 because that improvement will not breaking anything.

However, the Node version 4/6 are removed from the CI testing by that PR.

FYI.

[jimmywarting]

update versions

[Kikobeats]

Applied suggestions.

Can you take care about this PR? It's open for more than one year.

[huan]

Thanks for continue improving this PR!

Could you please bump the minor version to the next one (0.6.0 -> 0.7.0) so that we can make this change not affect the previous version users?

[Kikobeats]

I prefer to don't bump numbers in a PR; That's a thing can be done after merge the PR.

It looks like nobody has the ability to move this forward, so pinging @simonepri

[MikeMcC399]

@Kikobeats

For some reason your PR has remained open without being merged or rejected. In the meantime Node.js versions have moved on.

• I've submitted PR ci: update ci to supported node.js 18 - 23 versions #25 to update the Node.js versions. This would replace some of the changes in this PR. I did not make any changes to index.js or package.json, so these proposed changes would still be relevant.

[Kikobeats]

closing since authors are not interested