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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Framework: Add lerna to publish @automattic/simple-components (Take Two) #24788

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Framework: Add lerna to publish @automattic/simple-components (Take Two) #24788

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
4dc480e
Add core-js as dependency to package.json
jsnajdr Jul 19, 2018
850c496
Framework: Add lerna to publish @automattic/simple-components
ockham Aug 7, 2017
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions client/components/.gitignore
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
cjs
node_modules
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions client/components/.npmignore
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
node_modules
Copy link
Member

@simison simison Sep 6, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe node_modules is redundant here: https://docs.npmjs.com/misc/developers#keeping-files-out-of-your-package

9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions client/components/index.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
/** @format */

// Keep in sync with the `files` field in package.json!
// TODO: Can we auto-generate at build time?

export { Badge } from './badge';
export { Button } from './button';
export { Main } from './main';
export { Notice } from './notice';
45 changes: 45 additions & 0 deletions client/components/package.json
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,45 @@
{
"name": "@automattic/simple-components",
"version": "0.1.0-alpha.7",
"description": "React components, as used on WordPress.com",
"scripts": {
"build": "npx babel --only ./index.js,./badge/,./button/,./main/,./notice/ --out-dir cjs .",
"prepublishOnly": "npm run build"
},
"repository": {
"type": "git",
"url": "git+https://github.com/automattic/wp-calypso.git"
},
"keywords": [
"wordpress",
"react",
"components"
],
"author": "Automattic",
"license": "GPL-2.0+",
"bugs": {
"url": "https://github.com/automattic/wp-calypso/issues"
},
"homepage": "https://github.com/Automattic/wp-calypso/blob/master/docs/components.md",
"main": "./cjs/index.js",
"esnext": "./index.js",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we mirror the Gutenberg lerna config (build scripts etc...)?

We do publish two versions per module as well:

  • main which corresponds to the transpiled version
  • module which is a transpiled version but still using ES6 modules which guarantee tree shaking etc...

Is it a common usage to use an esnext property for untranspiled code? Also, how do we (package consumers) know what babel config or transpiling is needed with this field if it's not normalized?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

+1 on using main and module as you said.

the latest i've seen on publishing es6+ is https://babeljs.io/blog/2018/06/26/on-consuming-and-publishing-es2015+-packages

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

See react-router as an example:
https://unpkg.com/react-router@4.3.1/package.json

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we mirror the Gutenberg lerna config (build scripts etc...)?

I didn't want to necessarily introduce build scripts yet since that seemed overblown for the little amount of transpilation we're doing at this point (YAGNI -- might add them later as needed tho).

We do publish two versions per module as well:

  • main which corresponds to the transpiled version
  • module which is a transpiled version but still using ES6 modules which guarantee tree shaking etc...

Is it a common usage to use an esnext property for untranspiled code? Also, how do we (package consumers) know what babel config or transpiling is needed with this field if it's not normalized?

I picked up esnext from the 2ality blog, see PR desc:

http://2ality.com/2017/07/npm-packages-via-babel.html, and for more information, http://2ality.com/2017/04/transpiling-dependencies-babel.html and http://2ality.com/2017/06/pkg-esnext.html.

Granted, this is far from standardized, so I'm happy to reconsider.

"files": [
"index.js",
"cjs/",
"badge/",
"button/",
"main/",
"notice"
],
"dependencies": {
"classnames": "^2.2.6",
"gridicons": "^3.0.1",
"i18n-calypso": "^1.9.1",
"lodash": "^4.17.10",
"prop-types": "^15.6.2",
"react": "^16.4.1"
},
"publishConfig": {
"access": "public"
}
}
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions lerna.json
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,6 @@
{
"packages": [
"client/components"
],
"version": "independent"
}
Loading