Skip to content
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

Document yarnpkg. #1558

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 10, 2017
Merged

Document yarnpkg. #1558

merged 1 commit into from
May 10, 2017

Conversation

gsemet
Copy link
Contributor

@gsemet gsemet commented May 5, 2017

to avoid conflict with Hadoop Yarn cli.

I don’t know the best practice, but i do
have Apache Yarn installed on my machine, so
I get this conflict. Of course this conflict does
not arised when building within the docker.

see yarnpkg/yarn#2337
Signed-off-by: Gaetan Semet gaetan@xeberon.net

@ldez ldez self-requested a review May 5, 2017 16:21
@emilevauge
Copy link
Member

Hi @stibbons, thanks for your PR :)
Few questions:
1/ What is the need of modifying the Dockerfile here?
2/ For the sake of simplicity, I would prefer mentioning the issue in the readme, without replacing yarn by yarnpkg.

@gsemet
Copy link
Contributor Author

gsemet commented May 9, 2017

Indeed, modifying the dockerfile is not mandatory.
I also agree to only notify this issue in the readme. It's just I spend a few minutes understanding why yarn was complying with aweful java stack trace :)

to avoid conflict with Hadoop Yarn cli.

I don’t know the best practice, but i do
have Apache Yarn installed on my machine, so
I get this conflict. Of course this conflict does
not arised when building within the docker.

yarnpkg/yarn#2337
Signed-off-by: Gaetan Semet <gaetan@xeberon.net>
@ldez ldez merged commit db09007 into traefik:master May 10, 2017
@ldez ldez modified the milestone: 1.4 May 19, 2017
@ldez ldez changed the title prefere yarnpkg over yarn Document yarnpkg. May 20, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants