Separate transitive lockfile dependencies - #9
Merged
Conversation
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 free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
Separate transitive lockfile dependencies from direct ones in the generated lockfile output, and make the demo surface that behavior clearly.
What changed
dependencies:# Transitive dependenciesonly when transitive entries are presentNWO@refentries inWriteDependencies(), with direct entries winning over transitive onestry-itoutput helpers so comment lines in the lockfile are visiblecheck-autofixdemo fixture to include a nested composite action so the transitive section appears in a normal non-interactive demoDemo
Verification
go test ./...demo/try-it.sh check-autofix