-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 48
Add prepublish script #71
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
Open
ljharb
wants to merge
2
commits into
59naga:master
Choose a base branch
from
ljharb:prepublish
base: master
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
| package-lock=false |
This file contains hidden or 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
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.
It can be useful for a library to have a lockfile checked in (and not published) so that build and test dependencies are locked to known-good versions.
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 don’t agree; that allows the package to pass tests while consumers fail them. Dev-only lockfiles are only appropriate for apps, not for packages.
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 mainly mention because I feel like I've had build and test specific dev-dependencies (such as babel-plugin-add-module-exports today :P ) break much more often than regular dependencies. It's a very painful experience to clone an old repository to make a quick tweak and find it can't even build. I find it important to guarantee that a project is in a buildable (and hopefully even fully-reproducible) state as it was in the last commit. Finding out about breakages in non-dev-dependencies is important, but omitting a lockfile so the next repo-cloner runs into it isn't the specific way I like to go about it for my own projects. (Personally, I like using greenkeeper for that sort of thing.)
I'm happy with whichever way this project goes, just wanted to dump some of my experiences and reasoning here! The main meat of this PR seems really needed and I definitely wouldn't want to delay that.
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.
Indeed you should use something like greenkeeper to keep up with that, rather than letting a project bitrot until you try to maintain it later.