docs: add section on peerDependenciesMeta field #1822
Closed
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
darcyclarke
added
Release 6.x
|
@foxxyz hey! Thanks for this. We'll be pulling this into the v7 beta... no changes required. |
|
Awesome, thanks for the review and let me know if there's anything you'd like me to add! |
remyrylan
reviewed
Sep 21, 2020
darcyclarke
added
the
Priority Backlog
darcyclarke
removed
the
Priority Backlog
8 tasks
darcyclarke
added
the
release: next
ruyadorno
approved these changes
Nov 3, 2020
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What
This PR adds documentation for the
peerDependenciesMetafield ofpackage.json.Why
This field was announced in the Summer 2019 roadmap and landed in #224, but does not seem to have been documented. I actually needed this field and thought npm did not support it, because Yarn documents it and npm does not. However, checking the source made me realize it was definitely implemented, but not documented (#1247).
References
Fixes #1247