Replace deprecated Chunk.modules usage #5160
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
The deprecation warning appears to cause build failures in some cases.
|
|
|
Thank you for your pull request! The most important CI builds succeeded, we’ll review the pull request soon. |
sokra
approved these changes
Jun 26, 2017
Closed
|
Thanks |
This was referenced Jul 7, 2017
This was referenced Nov 10, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Replaces deprecated usage of Chunk.modules.
Did you add tests for your changes?
No interface or functional changes.
If relevant, link to documentation update:
No documentation update.
Summary
Using output: libraryTarget: "amd" causes a deprecation warning. This appears to cause build failures in some circumstances. This change replaces the deprecated property use with an undeprecated method cal which contains the exact same functinality.
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
No.
Other information