-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 734
deps(types-node): avoid formal dependency on types-node22 #5801
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
5ea0cfd
implement any workaround
Hweinstock f6d8b09
add techdebt test
Hweinstock 8a056c4
Update packages/core/src/test/techdebt.test.ts
Hweinstock e4f647f
try node 18 types as dep
Hweinstock 53c87f4
Merge branch 'removeNodeTypes' of github.com:Hweinstock/aws-toolkit-v…
Hweinstock 728a145
update message in techdebt
Hweinstock 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
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Does it work if this is 18 instead of 22?
I'm confused about the relationship of the copyFiles.ts scripts vs the packages/x/package.json declarations.
As an alternative to
fs as any, maybe we could use thetechdebt.test.tsreminder to remind us to remove this top-level dependency when thegetMinNodejsVersionresult is new enough?Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Looks like that works as well, I can update the techdebt test to match. I thought avoiding the dependency was more important than the
anyworkaround. But I guess the version bump isn't something to worry about? Are there any other tradeoffs to consider?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.
Since this PR makes the total cost clearer (i.e.: small :), I'm having doubts. And also, since the risk is covered by techdebt.test.ts in either case, perhaps it's better to have type checking.
Either way is fine IMO.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 think I'll keep the dependency then. Since its just a version bump (to an old stable version) and not a whole new thing, the cost seems very low. The
anycode doesn't read well, and could cause confusion to someone without the necessary context.