Add new pnpm e2e test#96
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Michal Šoltis <msoltis@redhat.com>
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request establishes a pnpm v10 test scenario by adding a basic application structure and defining dependencies from various sources including JSR, GitHub, and local files. Feedback highlights critical issues with the dependency configuration, specifically a missing local tarball for @tailwindcss/root and invalid version tags for lodash and semver. Furthermore, the lockfile version (9.0) is inconsistent with the specified pnpm v10 package manager.
| "packageManager": "pnpm@10.33.4+sha512.1c67b3b359b2d408119ba1ed289f34b8fc3c6873412bec6fd264fbdc82489e510fcbecb9ce9d22dae7f3b76269d8441046014bdca53b9979cd7a561ad631b800", | ||
| "dependencies": { | ||
| "@hono/hono": "jsr:^4.12.23", | ||
| "@tailwindcss/root": "file:tailwindcss-4.3.0.tar.gz", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we try LFS instead of committing binary files to git history?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
So what is the benefit of committing a binary blob to git history?
Let me suggest a clean alternative if we don't agree on blobs in git history - could we just commit our own artificial package.json file and create an archive out of it as part of the e2e integration test itself?
This is non-blocking, I am opinionated, but since it's tests I think I could live with it, just make sure you pick a tiny tarball.
Signed-off-by: Michal Šoltis <msoltis@redhat.com>
|
6 declared dependencies and pnpm-lock 81 lines 🌮 |
2 participants
No description provided.