rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Add copy buttons to all \u003cpre\u003e\u003ccode\u003e blocks\n(function() {\n function addCopyButtons() {\n document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {\n if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;\n codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');\n \n var btn = document.createElement('button');\n btn.textContent = 'Copy';\n btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';\n btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };\n btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };\n btn.onclick = function() {\n navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {\n btn.textContent = 'Copied!';\n setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);\n });\n };\n codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';\n codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);\n });\n }\n \n addCopyButtons();\n \n // Re-run on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "github.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode\n(function() {\n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '\n .markdown-body {\n color-scheme: dark light;\n }\n .markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }\n .markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }\n .markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }\n .markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }\n .markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }\n .markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }\n ';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n})();", "GitHub Dark Mode README Fix"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer\n(function() {\n var ref = document.referrer;\n var terms = [];\n \n if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {\n var url = new URL(ref);\n var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');\n if (q) {\n terms = q.split(/\\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length \u003e 2; });\n }\n }\n \n if (terms.length === 0) return;\n \n var style = document.createElement('style');\n style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n \n function highlight(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node\n var text = node.textContent;\n var found = false;\n terms.forEach(function(term) {\n var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\\]\\\\]/g, '\\\\') + ')', 'gi');\n if (regex.test(text)) {\n found = true;\n var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();\n var parts = text.split(regex);\n parts.forEach(function(part, i) {\n if (i % 2 === 0) {\n frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));\n } else {\n var span = document.createElement('span');\n span.className = 'userscript-highlight';\n span.textContent = part;\n frag.appendChild(span);\n }\n });\n node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);\n }\n });\n } else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element\n var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];\n if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {\n Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);\n }\n }\n }\n \n highlight(document.body);\n \n // Re-highlight on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Highlight Search Terms"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page\n(function() {\n var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',\n 'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',\n 'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];\n \n function cleanUrl(url) {\n try {\n var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);\n var changed = false;\n trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {\n if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {\n u.searchParams.delete(p);\n changed = true;\n }\n });\n return changed ? u.toString() : url;\n } catch (e) {\n return url;\n }\n }\n \n function cleanLinks() {\n document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n \n cleanLinks();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n mutations.forEach(function(m) {\n m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {\n if (node.nodeType === 1) {\n if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();\n node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {\n var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);\n if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;\n });\n }\n });\n });\n });\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "Remove Tracking Parameters from Links"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "youtube.com"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube\n(function() {\n function tryTheater() {\n var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label=\"Theater mode\"], ytd-player #player button[title=\"Theater mode\"]');\n if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {\n btn.click();\n }\n }\n \n // Try immediately\n tryTheater();\n \n // Try after navigation (SPA)\n var lastUrl = location.href;\n setInterval(function() {\n if (location.href !== lastUrl) {\n lastUrl = location.href;\n setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);\n }\n }, 1000);\n \n // Also try on player load\n var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });\n})();", "YouTube Theater Mode Default"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content\n(function() {\n function unstick() {\n document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role=\"banner\"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*=\"position: fixed\"], [style*=\"position:sticky\"]').forEach(function(el) {\n if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || \n getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {\n el.style.position = 'static';\n el.style.top = 'auto';\n el.style.zIndex = 'auto';\n }\n });\n }\n \n unstick();\n \n var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);\n observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });\n})();", "Kill Sticky Headers"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); } })(); (function(){ try { var __m = "*"; var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke
, 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { injectUserscript("// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site\n(function() {\n var enabled = true;\n \n function applyDarkMode() {\n if (!enabled) return;\n \n // Create style element if it doesn't exist\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (!style) {\n style = document.createElement('style');\n style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';\n document.head.appendChild(style);\n }\n \n // Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video\n style.textContent = '\n /* Invert everything except media */\n html {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #1a1a2e !important;\n }\n \n /* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */\n img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*=\"background-image\"] {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n }\n \n /* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */\n .no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,\n [data-theme=\"light\"], [data-theme=\"light\"],\n .ace_editor, .ace_editor *,\n .CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,\n .monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,\n .markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,\n .highlight, .highlight *,\n pre code, pre code * {\n filter: none !important;\n }\n \n /* Fix common UI elements */\n .modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {\n filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;\n background: #2d2d44 !important;\n border-color: #444 !important;\n }\n \n /* Scrollbars */\n ::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }\n ::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }\n \n /* Selection */\n ::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }\n ';\n }\n \n function removeDarkMode() {\n var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');\n if (style) style.remove();\n }\n \n // Toggle with Alt+Shift+D\n document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {\n if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {\n e.preventDefault();\n enabled = !enabled;\n if (enabled) {\n applyDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');\n } else {\n removeDarkMode();\n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');\n }\n }\n });\n \n // Apply on load\n applyDarkMode();\n \n // Re-apply on dynamic content\n var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {\n if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {\n applyDarkMode();\n }\n });\n observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });\n \n console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');\n})();", "Universal Dark Mode"); } } catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); } })(); })();
Skip to content

rfc: Hook script linking - #48

Closed
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking
Closed

rfc: Hook script linking#48
lachlanhunt wants to merge 1 commit into
npm:mainfrom
lachlanhunt:hook-script-linking

Conversation

@lachlanhunt

Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

@isaacs

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

My main concern to investigate would be timing during installation.

Ie, if you npm install, and one of the packages being installed adds a preinstall hook, does it fire for the modules installed afterwards? If it adds a postinstall hook, does it fire for itself?

Even if we're ok with whatever the current default behavior would be, I'd like it documented so we don't break folks later by changing some undefined behavior.

@darcyclarkedarcyclarke added Enhancement new feature or improvement Needs Discussion is pending a discussion semver:minor new backwards-compatible feature Needs Documentation pull request requires docs before merging labels Oct 30, 2019
@wesleytodd

wesleytodd commented Nov 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Since there can be only one file of each name (each of the predefined list of hook scripts), you would need some resolution logic to determine which to link wins or how to call them all (possibly changing the way that feature works today). Also, allowing any hook from any direct or transitive dep to be called for every installed dependency just by defining one in its package.json seems like an unintended (or at least unexpected) behavior.

Maybe I am not seeing the clear path forward for this RFC, but it seems like it is missing some large issues as it is defined today.

@darcyclarke

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing this as hook scripts were removed in v7

owlstronaut pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 29, 2026
Bot-generated transition of RFC **#48** to status `implemented`.
Moved to `implemented/0048-no-integrity-for-git.md`. Front-matter
`status` and the relevant date field were updated. `INDEX.md` was
regenerated.
Implementation: npm/cli#4468
Co-authored-by: npm CLI robot <npm-cli+bot@github.com>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Enhancementnew feature or improvementNeeds Discussionis pending a discussionNeeds Documentationpull request requires docs before mergingsemver:minornew backwards-compatible feature

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants

@lachlanhunt@isaacs@wesleytodd@darcyclarke