Remove wrench, fs-plus in favor of fs-extra

[50Wliu]

Requirements

• Filling out the template is required. Any pull request that does not include enough information to be reviewed in a timely manner may be closed at the maintainers' discretion.
• All new code requires tests to ensure against regressions

Description of the Change

wrench has been deprecated for a few years in favor of fs-extra. However, since both fs-plus and fs-extra happen to extend fs, it would be illogical to use both of them in the same codebase. Therefore, this PR removes both wrench and fs-plus and uses fs-extra instead.

Alternate Designs

None.

Benefits

1. Using a better-maintained fs alternative
2. No longer depending on a deprecated package that isn't being updated

Possible Drawbacks

There were two troublesome functions with this swap:

1. fs.is(Directory|File)Sync

fs-extra doesn't have any way to easily determine if a path is a directory or file without the possibility of throwing exceptions. I've tried to emulate that as best as I could using trys everywhere, but it's not that good-looking and the behavior might be subtly different in a few places (we may now throw where we didn't before).

2. fs.writeFileSync

fs-plus creates any necessary directories first if the path doesn't exist; fs-extra doesn't. I tried to add fs.mkdirp calls wherever necessary but I may have missed a few.

Verification Process

For now, just the specs. This will clearly need some extra real-world stress testing as I do not trust these specs.

Applicable Issues

N/A

[50Wliu]

Checked over all the writeFileSyncs and can confirm that they'll always be writing in an existing folder 👍

[as-cii]

Thanks for getting rid of some deprecated packages, @50Wliu! ✨

@nathansobo and I reviewed this, and we think it might make sense to keep the wrapper fs.coffee file, so that we can put try/catch blocks around functions that now throw an exception in a single place and reduce the risk of missing some of them.

Other than that, this seems like a great change and we should merge this once conflicts are resolved. ⚡️

[DeeDeeG]

Is this PR still active? I would be interested in taking a shot at updating this against master.

[DeeDeeG]

Here is an updated version of this PR (with master branch merged in): master...DeeDeeG:wl-fs-extra-merge-master

CI passes: https://travis-ci.com/github/DeeDeeG/apm/builds/179155533

Please consider reviewing. IMO it would be great to start updating apm's dependencies, and I'd be excited if this got merged! Thanks for considering.

---

For your reference, these were the significant commits to master since this PR was posted that caused manual intervention to be needed:

• 44b3677
• 51adfea
• fdfe3ca
• various package bumps in package.json and package-lock.json over time

[50Wliu]

Is this PR still active?

Uhh...not really, sorry 😬. If you have a branch that is updated, I'd encourage you to open it as a PR!
I'll close this to reduce confusion.

[DeeDeeG]

@50Wliu thanks for the reply! I opened #894 with the updated branch.