chore(refactor): promisify completion scripts by wraithgar · Pull Request #2759 · npm/cli

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:00:20Z

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing
script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in

wraithgar · 2021-02-23T00:23:11Z

Looks like something in the last patch to npm brought in more fs.promises references. That'll have to be fixed before CI is green.

nlf

this is an excellent refactor to remove some weirdness

that said, we should pick one way to define the completion function and stick with it. we have currently

function (opts) {}
async function (opts) {}
opts => {}
(opts) => {}
async (opts) => {}

i think the last one makes the most sense to use as the canonical definition style since we use arrow functions for most things, and just always declaring it async is nice for consistency

wraithgar · 2021-02-24T15:39:17Z

@nlf very good point. I tried to be aware of that when I was changing the tap functions (I think I got them to all be async t =>, but obviously forgot to do that to the actual function I was refactoring. I'll change that.

nlf

🎉

@kumavis

When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

@wraithgar

We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar requested a review from a team as a code owner February 23, 2021 00:00

wraithgar force-pushed the gar/completion-refactor branch from 8b31c04 to aaec756Compare February 23, 2021 00:06

wraithgar force-pushed the gar/completion-refactor branch from aaec756 to 4fd1322Compare February 23, 2021 04:37

darcyclarke added Release 7.x work is associated with a specific npm 7 release semver:patch semver patch level for changes labels Feb 23, 2021

nlf suggested changes Feb 24, 2021
View reviewed changes

wraithgar force-pushed the gar/completion-refactor branch from 4fd1322 to 182b362Compare February 24, 2021 17:15

nlf approved these changes Feb 24, 2021
View reviewed changes

wraithgar force-pushed the gar/completion-refactor branch from 182b362 to 5ae2dc1Compare February 24, 2021 18:05

wraithgar added the release: next These items should be addressed in the next release label Feb 24, 2021

wraithgar mentioned this pull request Feb 24, 2021
fix(npm) pass npm context everywhere #2772
Merged

wraithgarand others added 4 commits February 25, 2021 09:44

chore(package-lock): resetdeps and eslint@7.20.0
b9fa7e3

arborist@2.2.5
28d036a

fix(explain): mark when dependency is bundled
983d218
When using `npm explain <package>` it's useful to see if the package has been bundled. This is especially useful when trying to understand the provenance of a package's content PR-URL: #2750 Credit: @kumavisClose: #2750 Reviewed-by: @nlf

chore(refactor): promisify completion scripts
2ed0cc8
We also removed the "none" script because we handle a missing script just fine. There is no need to put an empty one in PR-URL: #2759 Credit: @wraithgarClose: #2759 Reviewed-by: @nlf

wraithgar force-pushed the gar/completion-refactor branch from 5ae2dc1 to 2ed0cc8Compare February 25, 2021 17:52

wraithgar closed this in 113b131Feb 25, 2021

wraithgar deleted the gar/completion-refactor branch November 2, 2021 20:05