-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
front: switch from yarn to npm #9169
Conversation
0845e2d
to
068566f
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## dev #9169 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 38.19% 79.84% +41.64%
===========================================
Files 998 1053 +55
Lines 92197 105088 +12891
Branches 1192 757 -435
===========================================
+ Hits 35219 83909 +48690
+ Misses 56522 21138 -35384
+ Partials 456 41 -415
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
I had success running https://github.com/imsnif/synp I think we'd be less likely to run into issues if we can use this tool instead of crossing fingers. |
f93eaa3
to
01593dc
Compare
fd7c55e
to
6e85906
Compare
a351913
to
4ef8616
Compare
|
32d76db
to
cb4fea5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks for the README update
The dependency in the lockfile is probably valid, the rest probably isn't. |
you're right, I removed the useless mentions in |
d622b9c
to
487659a
Compare
The |
487659a
to
ee40939
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The changes look good to me!
My only remaining worry is that during the various iterations of this PR, the package-lock.json
file has evolved and contains unwanted changes. For instance, at some point some dependencies were upgraded in package.json
. To ensure we keep the NPM dependency tree as similar as possible to yarn's (and resolve the yarn.lock
conflicts with the dev branch), I'd suggest we re-generate package-lock.json
from yarn.lock
by running npm install
on the dev branch and then using the resulting package-lock.json
file as-is in this branch. Wdyt?
d443e01
to
653bebe
Compare
bc73971
to
c504a08
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've applied my suggestion above, rebased, and also had to add --package-lock-only
for npm list
to make it work without a prior npm install
.
This LGTM, but it would be best if another maintainer could review as well!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not tested but LGTM
38c8eaf
to
73130ea
Compare
Signed-off-by: Yohh <durandyohan@zaclys.net> Signed-off-by: Simon Ser <contact@emersion.fr>
73130ea
to
8bef3dc
Compare
Some platform-specific optional dependencies were missing from npm install --save-dev rollup@4.23.0 @swc/core@1.7.26
git restore package.json
npm install |
everything works fine for me on macos and linux |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lgtm and tested !
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM ✅
close #9143