[Proposal] yarn to npm #4904
[Proposal] yarn to npm #4904
Conversation
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4904 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 96.39% 96.39%
=======================================
Files 28 28
Lines 3305 3305
Branches 1387 1400 +13
=======================================
Hits 3186 3186
+ Misses 119 115 -4
- Partials 0 4 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
![pullrequest[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/3434?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
✅ This pull request was sent to the PullRequest network for review. Expert reviewers are now being matched to your request based on the code's requirements. Stay tuned!
What to expect from this code review:
- Comments posted to any areas of potential concern or improvement.
- Detailed feedback or actions needed to resolve issues that are found.
- Turnaround times vary, but we aim to be swift.
@yuki0410-dev you can click here to see the review status or cancel the code review job.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PullRequest Breakdown
Reviewable lines of change
+ 84
- 110
31% GitHubActions
23% JSON
22% Markdown
18% GitHubActions (tests)
6% OtherGenerated lines of change
+ 92,081
- 26,420
Type of change
Feature - These changes are adding a new feature or improvement to existing code.
|
|
||
| - name: Check Code Formatter | ||
| run: yarn prettier:check | ||
|
|
||
| - name: Type Check |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since type check by tsc is already performed at the time of rollup build and at the time of ts-jest execution, it is not necessary to perform it again here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
On its own, this change looks fine sans a formatting nit. However, changing from yarn to npm is a fairly significant change to be occurring without previous consensus on doing so. Personally, I don't see the need for it, particularly as there is a workaround that is already being used. However this decision is up to the HackerOne team.
Reviewed with ❤️ by PullRequest
yuki0410-dev
force-pushed
the
feat/remove-yarn
branch
from
c837d99
to
7540528
Compare
I agree.
There are some PACKAGES that cannot be deleted due to the use of YARN. I have not had any problems at all with npm.
I think you are right. |
|
@martijnrusschen |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PullRequest reviewed the updates made to #4904 since our last review was posted. This includes comments that have been posted by non-PullRequest reviewers. No further issues were found.
Reviewed by:
yuki0410-dev
force-pushed
the
feat/remove-yarn
branch
from
7540528
to
c86a0e8
Compare
|
@martijnrusschen |
yuki0410-dev
force-pushed
the
feat/remove-yarn
branch
2 times, most recently
from
967277e
to
ba68923
Compare
yuki0410-dev
force-pushed
the
feat/remove-yarn
branch
from
ba68923
to
84d808f
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Due to inactivity, PullRequest has cancelled this review job. You can reactivate the code review job from the PullRequest dashboard.
Description: I suggest moving from yarn to npm.
Linked issue: -
Problem
Changes
Contribution checklist