Replies: 4 comments 5 replies
|
This is now supported with #8059! |
|
Hey, did you guys had success auto-installing "devEngines": {
"runtime": {
"name": "node",
"version": ">=24.0.0",
"onFail": "error"
},
"packageManager": {
"name": "yarn",
"version": ">=4.12.0",
"onFail": "error"
}
},Did I miss something? |
It seems to not read the server string correctly, it's trying to request the exact version rather than moving up to 25.8.2 |
|
We have a project which required minimum version of node due to a dependency feature ( We kept our in package.json: Weirdly, I am seeing different behaviour on two machines. On mine, it tries to install node 26: On my colleagues, it will attempt to install exactly node The devengines field serves pnpm and works well for that use case, but not so well for Closed separate discussion here: #11465 |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Hi there, we've recently moved to Mise and really like it. Thanks for all of the hard work!
We'd like to keep our versions in sync between
package.jsonandmise.toml, as a lot of ecosystem tooling refers topackage.jsonas the source of truth.I realise there have been requests before for
packageManagersupport, but with Corepack no longer shipped with Node.js, anddevEnginessupporting more than just a package manager, it feels like the better fit. The ecosystem is starting to align around this, i.e. pnpm/pnpm#8153.I think this would be the priority:
devEngines: All tools, designed for this purpose.packageManager- Designed for package managers only.engines- Designed for install/runtime requirements.These are some alternatives I can think of:
I'm also happy to try to and contribute a PR for this.
All reactions