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

refactor: rename force to optimizeDeps.force #8418

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jun 17, 2022

Conversation

sapphi-red
Copy link
Member

@sapphi-red sapphi-red commented May 31, 2022

Description

server.force was removed in #8280.

refs #8398

Additional context

The following options were missing from docs. Most of them are experimental, so it is intended?


What is the purpose of this pull request?

  • Bug fix
  • New Feature
  • Documentation update
  • Other

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • Read the Contributing Guidelines.
  • Read the Pull Request Guidelines and follow the Commit Convention.
  • Check that there isn't already a PR that solves the problem the same way to avoid creating a duplicate.
  • Provide a description in this PR that addresses what the PR is solving, or reference the issue that it solves (e.g. fixes #123).
  • Ideally, include relevant tests that fail without this PR but pass with it.

@sapphi-red sapphi-red added the documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label May 31, 2022
@patak-dev
Copy link
Member

Thanks for creating this list. Let's discuss it in a team meeting. Some are not documented because they are experimental and specific to a very small fraction of users (extensions for example) and some others because they were just added tagging them as experimental just to be able to move forward with the alphas (needsInterop). We still need to discuss the naming of these. I added some to the Migration guide to help the ecosystem maintainers when testing the current alpha.

Placing it on hold until we talked with the team. Maybe server.force should remain and we need a new build.force for example.

@patak-dev patak-dev added the p2-to-be-discussed Enhancement under consideration (priority) label May 31, 2022
@benmccann
Copy link
Collaborator

It looks like there may also be an undocumented configFile: false option?

@patak-dev patak-dev added p3-significant High priority enhancement (priority) and removed p2-to-be-discussed Enhancement under consideration (priority) labels Jun 17, 2022
@sapphi-red sapphi-red changed the title docs: remove server.force docs: rename force to optimizeDeps.force Jun 17, 2022
@sapphi-red sapphi-red added this to the 3.0 milestone Jun 17, 2022
@sapphi-red
Copy link
Member Author

I renamed force to optimizeDeps.force as we discussed.

bluwy
bluwy previously approved these changes Jun 17, 2022
Co-authored-by: patak <matias.capeletto@gmail.com>
@patak-dev patak-dev changed the title docs: rename force to optimizeDeps.force refactor: rename force to optimizeDeps.force Jun 17, 2022
@patak-dev patak-dev merged commit f520a54 into vitejs:main Jun 17, 2022
@sapphi-red sapphi-red deleted the docs/remove-server-force branch June 17, 2022 16:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
documentation Improvements or additions to documentation p3-significant High priority enhancement (priority)
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants