Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
docs: remove redundant statement about files attribute - #6557
Merged
Conversation
…es" field The statement: 'Files included with the "package.json#files" field cannot be excluded through `.npmignore` or `.gitignore`'. Is inaccurate and redundant as the concept is already being explained right above: 'You can also provide a `.npmignore` file in the root of your package or in subdirectories, which will keep files from being included. At the root of your package it will not override the "files" field, but in subdirectories it will. The `.npmignore` file works just like a `.gitignore.` If there is a `.gitignore` file, and `.npmignore` is missing, `.gitignore`'s contents will be used instead'.
wraithgar
approved these changes
Jun 20, 2023
Merged
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
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The statement:
Is inaccurate and redundant as the concept is already being explained right above:
References