Update Maintainer's Guide #1265
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@misscoded My comments are mostly questions for clarification. The changes you've made to the doc are making sense to me (with the current context I have!)
| this project. If you use this package within your own software but don't plan on modifying it, this guide is | ||
| **not** for you. | ||
| ## 🛠 Tools | ||
| Maintaining this project requires installing [Node.js](https://nodejs.org). All of the remaining tools are downloaded as `devDependencies`, which means you'll have them available once you run `npm install` in a working copy of this repository. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: When I installed the modules, I ran into some deprecation warnings for some of the listed dependencies. Would it make sense to track an issue to update these?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Great question! The vulnerabilities look to be all associated with lerna. Since we're moving towards removing lerna all together, I don't believe it's worth fixing it beforehand, but if any if any of the other maintainers disagree on that point, we should definitely create an issue to address it.
|
|
||
| This project has tests for individual packages as `*.spec.js` files and inside of each's respective `test` directory. It also has | ||
| integration tests in the `integration-tests` directory under the root `support` directory. You can run the entire test | ||
| suite using the npm script `npm test` at the top level. This script will use Lerna to invoke tests in each package and |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Question: I think I'm missing a bit of context here on the motivation for removing all README references to Lerna.
When I run npm test and npm lint in the packages it seems like Lerna is still handling this, so it would make sense to me to keep some mention that Lerna is doing this locally, until the dependency is fully removed in a later PR. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I took a look because I wanted to make sure I didn't overlook anything, but lerna is only referenced at the root level package.json: none of the individual packages rely on it. I would have removed it entirely, but Steve hypothesized that we might cause CI errors, so I've omitted that from this PR.
Are you running these commands from the root level?
|
|
||
| ## Everything else | ||
| ### 📬 Triage | ||
| Triaging is the process of investigating new issues, assigning them an appropriate label, and responding to the submitting developer. An issue should have **one** of the following labels applied: `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, `needs feedback`, `docs`, `tests`, or `discussion`. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Triaging is the process of investigating new issues, assigning them an appropriate label, and responding to the submitting developer. An issue should have **one** of the following labels applied: `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, `needs feedback`, `docs`, `tests`, or `discussion`. | |
| Triaging is the process of investigating new issues, assigning them an appropriate label, and responding to the submitting developer. An issue should have **one** of the following labels applied: `bug`, `enhancement`, `question`, `needs info`, `docs`, `tests`, or `discussion`. |
Summary
The last run through the release process brought to light some deficiencies in our Maintainer's Guide. This PR aims to shore up those deficiencies and remove references to
lerna.Removing
lernaall together (package.json) is out of scope for this PR, but should be revisited.Requirements (place an
xin each[ ])