-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Dependency handling with lockfiles #70
Labels
Milestone
Comments
svengreb
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2021
The usage of dependency lockfiles like `package-lock.json` [1] or `yarn.lock` [2] has always been a controversial topic where opinions go in different directions. On one side many project maintainers tend to argue that is helps to achieve deterministic build results, but on the side it might also hide problems when any later versions of a used dependency, or its transitive dependencies, is not compatible with the own project anymore. I've investigated a lot of time into research again to finally find a solution that works for my projects. In short, the result is to go with the rule that is also used by many large-scale projects: Do not use lockfiles for multi-consumer projects like libraries but only for single-consumer projects like applications. Therefore the `yarn.lock` file has been removed since this makes no sense for a repository template anyway. See the sections below for some more details about how to decide to use a lockfile or not. >>> When to use lockfiles The clear advantage of lockfiles are reproducible builds and the persistence of a running project state. They ensure that a project artifact can be rebuild at anytime using the exact same dependencies, resulting in the exact sFame artifact, even when the project was not updated in years. This applies to projects that are focused on building a end-to-end experience like applications and other end-user products. These are the advantages listed in the official npm documentation about `package-lock.json` files: "- Describe a single representation of a dependency tree such that teammates, deployments, and continuous integration are guaranteed to install exactly the same dependencies. - Provide a facility for users to "time-travel" to previous states of `node_modules` without having to commit the directory itself. - Facilitate greater visibility of tree changes through readable source control diffs. - Optimize the installation process by allowing npm to skip repeated metadata resolutions for previously-installed packages. - As of npm `v7`, lockfiles include enough information to gain a complete picture of the package tree, reducing the need to read `package.json` files, and allowing for significant performance improvements." Like mentioned, npm `v7` comes with a lot of advantages and the team recommends to commit the file into project repositories [3]: - the lockfile has enough information to describe the precise package tree all by itself. - the lockfile maps the packages to their information by their relative location to the root (instead of their name). - the npm CLI uses `yarn.lock` lockfiles if available, as a source of package metadata and resolution guidance when there is missing information, knowing that the `package-lock.json` is the authoritative definition. - `yarn.lock` lockfiles cannot completely replace npm’s lockfile since the current implementation doesn’t have enough information needed for the complete npm functionality. - the npm CLI uses a "hidden lockfile" placed inside the `node_module` directory that helps to avoid repeated package tree reading. Another points is that in end-user projects dependencies in `package.json` files are pinned often instead of using SemVer range selectors [4] like `^` (latest minor-only) or `~` (latest patch only). In such cases a lockfile helps to keep control about transitive dependencies and persist projects states in time. >>> When to avoid lockfiles Even though the Yarn team published a blog post in 2016 [5] that states to always commit the `yarn.lock` file, regardless of the project type, this advice was not adopted by every project and some "real-world scenarios" often showed that this decision was justified. There are blog posts that summarize when not to use a lockfile [6] where even Yarn maintainers reply with comments that claim the opposite [7], but over the time more and more projects went away from using lockfiles. One argument is that lockfiles are important to enure that library contributors in 10 years still know what was the last confirmed set of packages which worked as expected [8], but this can almost be ignored in a ecosystem like Node that changes almost every day. Another important point is to mention that the usage of lockfiles were also a attack surface to inject malicious dependencies [9]. Due to the large size of lockfiles, it is also often a challenge for project maintainers to review and validate a lockfile in pull requests are so they are often ignored and blindly trusted [10]. The community is still not of one opinion and I guess this will never change, but learning about the experience of well-known maintainers [11] and popular projects [12] is often a good way to find the own decision. In conclusion, the usage of lockfiles in a non-end-user project can be well summarized with "just postponing the inevitable breakage" [13]. [1]: https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/v7/configuring-npm/package-lock-json [2]: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/en/docs/yarn-lock [3]: https://blog.npmjs.org/post/621733939456933888/npm-v7-series-why-keep-package-lockjson.html [4]: https://semver.npmjs.com [5]: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2016/11/24/lockfiles-for-all [6]: https://dev.to/gajus/stop-using-package-lock-json-or-yarn-lock-3ddi [7]: https://dev.to/arcanis/comment/fo33 [8]: https://twitter.com/arcanis/status/1164229994165559299?s=19 [9]: https://snyk.io/blog/why-npm-lockfiles-can-be-a-security-blindspot-for-injecting-malicious-modules [10]: https://twitter.com/bcrypt/status/1208950722097598465 [11]: sindresorhus/ama#479 (comment) [12]: airbnb/javascript#2409 [13]: https://twitter.com/renovatebot/status/1163789817492230144 GH-70
svengreb
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Apr 1, 2021
The usage of dependency lockfiles like `package-lock.json` [1] or `yarn.lock` [2] has always been a controversial topic where opinions go in different directions. On one side many project maintainers tend to argue that is helps to achieve deterministic build results, but on the side it might also hide problems when any later versions of a used dependency, or its transitive dependencies, is not compatible with the own project anymore. I've investigated a lot of time into research again to finally find a solution that works for my projects. In short, the result is to go with the rule that is also used by many large-scale projects: Do not use lockfiles for multi-consumer projects like libraries but only for single-consumer projects like applications. Therefore the `yarn.lock` file has been removed since this makes no sense for a repository template anyway. See the sections below for some more details about how to decide to use a lockfile or not. >>> When to use lockfiles The clear advantage of lockfiles are reproducible builds and the persistence of a running project state. They ensure that a project artifact can be rebuild at anytime using the exact same dependencies, resulting in the exact sFame artifact, even when the project was not updated in years. This applies to projects that are focused on building a end-to-end experience like applications and other end-user products. These are the advantages listed in the official npm documentation about `package-lock.json` files: "- Describe a single representation of a dependency tree such that teammates, deployments, and continuous integration are guaranteed to install exactly the same dependencies. - Provide a facility for users to "time-travel" to previous states of `node_modules` without having to commit the directory itself. - Facilitate greater visibility of tree changes through readable source control diffs. - Optimize the installation process by allowing npm to skip repeated metadata resolutions for previously-installed packages. - As of npm `v7`, lockfiles include enough information to gain a complete picture of the package tree, reducing the need to read `package.json` files, and allowing for significant performance improvements." Like mentioned, npm `v7` comes with a lot of advantages and the team recommends to commit the file into project repositories [3]: - the lockfile has enough information to describe the precise package tree all by itself. - the lockfile maps the packages to their information by their relative location to the root (instead of their name). - the npm CLI uses `yarn.lock` lockfiles if available, as a source of package metadata and resolution guidance when there is missing information, knowing that the `package-lock.json` is the authoritative definition. - `yarn.lock` lockfiles cannot completely replace npm’s lockfile since the current implementation doesn’t have enough information needed for the complete npm functionality. - the npm CLI uses a "hidden lockfile" placed inside the `node_module` directory that helps to avoid repeated package tree reading. Another points is that in end-user projects dependencies in `package.json` files are pinned often instead of using SemVer range selectors [4] like `^` (latest minor-only) or `~` (latest patch only). In such cases a lockfile helps to keep control about transitive dependencies and persist projects states in time. >>> When to avoid lockfiles Even though the Yarn team published a blog post in 2016 [5] that states to always commit the `yarn.lock` file, regardless of the project type, this advice was not adopted by every project and some "real-world scenarios" often showed that this decision was justified. There are blog posts that summarize when not to use a lockfile [6] where even Yarn maintainers reply with comments that claim the opposite [7], but over the time more and more projects went away from using lockfiles. One argument is that lockfiles are important to enure that library contributors in 10 years still know what was the last confirmed set of packages which worked as expected [8], but this can almost be ignored in a ecosystem like Node that changes almost every day. Another important point is to mention that the usage of lockfiles were also a attack surface to inject malicious dependencies [9]. Due to the large size of lockfiles, it is also often a challenge for project maintainers to review and validate a lockfile in pull requests are so they are often ignored and blindly trusted [10]. The community is still not of one opinion and I guess this will never change, but learning about the experience of well-known maintainers [11] and popular projects [12] is often a good way to find the own decision. In conclusion, the usage of lockfiles in a non-end-user project can be well summarized with "just postponing the inevitable breakage" [13]. [1]: https://docs.npmjs.com/cli/v7/configuring-npm/package-lock-json [2]: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/en/docs/yarn-lock [3]: https://blog.npmjs.org/post/621733939456933888/npm-v7-series-why-keep-package-lockjson.html [4]: https://semver.npmjs.com [5]: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2016/11/24/lockfiles-for-all [6]: https://dev.to/gajus/stop-using-package-lock-json-or-yarn-lock-3ddi [7]: https://dev.to/arcanis/comment/fo33 [8]: https://twitter.com/arcanis/status/1164229994165559299?s=19 [9]: https://snyk.io/blog/why-npm-lockfiles-can-be-a-security-blindspot-for-injecting-malicious-modules [10]: https://twitter.com/bcrypt/status/1208950722097598465 [11]: sindresorhus/ama#479 (comment) [12]: airbnb/javascript#2409 [13]: https://twitter.com/renovatebot/status/1163789817492230144 Closes GH-70
svengreb
added a commit
to svengreb/tmpl-go
that referenced
this issue
Apr 27, 2021
Updated to `tmpl` version `0.9.0` [1] which moves from Yarn back to npm again [2], improves and clarifies the handling of lockfiles [3] and comes with some major Node package dependency & GitHub action version updates. [1]: https://github.com/svengreb/tmpl/releases/tag/v0.9.0 [2]: svengreb/tmpl#72 [3]: svengreb/tmpl#70 GH-58
svengreb
added a commit
to svengreb/tmpl-go
that referenced
this issue
Apr 27, 2021
Updated to `tmpl` version `0.9.0` [1] which moves from Yarn back to npm again [2], improves and clarifies the handling of lockfiles [3] and comes with some major Node package dependency & GitHub action version updates. [1]: https://github.com/svengreb/tmpl/releases/tag/v0.9.0 [2]: svengreb/tmpl#72 [3]: svengreb/tmpl#70 Closes GH-58
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
The usage of dependency lockfiles like
package-lock.json
oryarn.lock
has always been a controversial topic where opinions go in different directions. On one side many project maintainers tend to argue that it helps to achieve deterministic build results, but on the side it might also hide problems when any later versions of a used dependency, or its transitive dependencies, is not compatible with the own project anymore.I‘ve investigated a lot of time into research again to finally find a solution that works for my projects. In short, the result is to go with the rule that is also used by many large-scale projects: Do not use lockfiles for multi-consumer projects like libraries but only for single-consumer projects like applications.
Therefore the currently committed
yarn.lock
file will be removed since this makes no sense for a repository template anyway. See the sections below for some more details about how to decide to use a lockfile or not.When to use lockfiles
The clear advantage of lockfiles are reproducible builds and the persistence of a running project state. They ensure that a project artifact can be rebuild at anytime using the exact same dependencies, resulting in the exact same artifact, even when the project was not updated in years.
This applies to projects that are focused on building a end-to-end experience like applications and other end-user products.
These are the advantages listed in the official npm documentation about
package-lock.json
files:Like mentioned, npm
v7
comes with a lot of advantages and the team recommends to commit the file into project repositories:yarn.lock
lockfiles if available, as a source of package metadata and resolution guidance when there is missing information, knowing that thepackage-lock.json
is the authoritative definition.yarn.lock
lockfiles cannot completely replace npm’s lockfile since the current implementation doesn’t have enough information needed for the complete npm functionality.node_module
directory that helps to avoid repeated package tree reading.Another points is that in end-user projects dependencies in
package.json
files are pinned often instead of using SemVer range selectors like^
(latest minor-only) or~
(latest patch only). In such cases a lockfile helps to keep control about transitive dependencies and persist projects states in time.When to avoid lockfiles
Even though the Yarn team published a blog post in 2016 that states to always commit the
yarn.lock
file, regardless of the project type, this advice was not adopted by every project and some “real-world scenarios“ often showed that this decision was justified. There are blog posts that summarize when not to use a lockfile where even Yarn maintainers reply with comments that claim the opposite, but over the time more and more projects went away from using lockfiles.One argument is that lockfiles are important to enure that library contributors in 10 years still know what was the last confirmed set of packages which worked as expected, but this can almost be ignored in a ecosystem like Node that changes almost every day.
Another important point is to mention that the usage of lockfiles were also a attack surface to inject malicious dependencies. Due to the large size of lockfiles, it is also often a challenge for project maintainers to review and validate a lockfile in pull requests are so they are often ignored and blindly trusted.
The community is still not of one opinion and I guess this will never change, but learning about the experience of well-known maintainers and popular projects is often a good way to find the own decision.
In conclusion, the usage of lockfiles in a non-end-user project can be well summarized with “just postponing the inevitable breakage“:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: