Issue 29723665: Issue 6488 - Dependency update fails due to missing dependencies

Keyboard Shortcuts

	File
u :	up to issue
m :	publish + mail comments
M :	edit review message
j / k :	jump to file after / before current file
J / K :	jump to next file with a comment after / before current file
	Side-by-side diff
i :	toggle intra-line diffs
e :	expand all comments
c :	collapse all comments
s :	toggle showing all comments
n / p :	next / previous diff chunk or comment
N / P :	next / previous comment
<Up> / <Down> :	next / previous line
<Enter> :	respond to / edit current comment
d :	mark current comment as done

	Issue
u :	up to list of issues
m :	publish + mail comments
j / k :	jump to patch after / before current patch
o / <Enter> :	open current patch in side-by-side view
i :	open current patch in unified diff view

	Issue List
j / k :	jump to issue after / before current issue
o / <Enter> :	open current issue
# :	close issue

	Comment/message editing
<Ctrl> + s or <Ctrl> + Enter :	save comment
<Esc> :	cancel edit

Issue 29723665: Issue 6488 - Dependency update fails due to missing dependencies (Closed)

Created:
March 15, 2018, 7:09 p.m. by saroyanm

Modified:
March 16, 2018, 10:49 a.m.

Reviewers:
Thomas Greiner, a.giammarchi

Visibility:
Public.

Description

Issue 6488 - Dependency update fails due to missing dependencies

Patch Set 2 : Updated the README #

Total comments: 2

Created: March 15, 2018, 8:52 p.m.

Download [raw] [tar.bz2]

		Unified diffs	Side-by-side diffs	Delta from patch set	Stats (+3 lines, -1 line)			Patch
	M	README.md	View	1	1 chunk	+2 lines, -0 lines	2 comments	Download
	M	package.json	View		1 chunk	+1 line, -1 line	0 comments	Download

Messages

Total messages: 5

Expand All Messages | Collapse All Messages

a.giammarchi

On 2018/03/15 19:10:48, saroyanm wrote: > Ready for the review Not sure it's worth adding ...

March 15, 2018, 7:35 p.m. (2018-03-15 19:35:48 UTC) #2

saroyanm

On 2018/03/15 19:35:48, a.giammarchi wrote: > On 2018/03/15 19:10:48, saroyanm wrote: > > Ready for ...

March 15, 2018, 8:53 p.m. (2018-03-15 20:53:22 UTC) #3

saroyanm

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29723665/diff/29723668/README.md File README.md (right): https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29723665/diff/29723668/README.md#newcode20 README.md:20: **Note:** [devDependencies](https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#devdependencies) are not preinstalled during extension build, use ...

March 15, 2018, 8:57 p.m. (2018-03-15 20:57:37 UTC) #4

a.giammarchi

March 15, 2018, 10:36 p.m. (2018-03-15 22:36:52 UTC) #5

LGTM

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29723665/diff/29723668/README.md
File README.md (right):

https://codereview.adblockplus.org/29723665/diff/29723668/README.md#newcode20
README.md:20: **Note:**
[devDependencies](https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#devdependencies) are
not preinstalled during extension build, use
[dependencies](https://docs.npmjs.com/files/package.json#dependencies) instead.
On 2018/03/15 20:57:37, saroyanm wrote:
> Giving another thought, I'm not sure if it's an unexpected behavior that
> devDependencies are not included in the production builds.

devDependencies are *never* shipped to production. These are meant to be kept
locally or for CI/testing.

In our case UI is bundled by third parts and they are responsible to pick the
right files so we're good with dependencies, simply because we are not directly
hooked in their bundling chain.

As result, I think this is OK now.

Expand All Messages | Collapse All Messages