Skip to content
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

Fixes scoped packages cache and their offline installation #4992

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sharno
Copy link

@sharno sharno commented Nov 25, 2017

Summary
Fixes #4266. I flattened the cache folder (no more nesting of scoped packages in a scope folder) and included the scope in the name of the folder in cache.

Test plan
I can add tests to integration for testing the issue with installing offline packages. But want to make sure that this solution makes sense first.

@buildsize
Copy link

buildsize bot commented Nov 25, 2017

This change will increase the build size from 10.26 MB to 10.26 MB, an increase of 912 bytes (0%)

File name Previous Size New Size Change
yarn-[version].noarch.rpm 886.52 KB 886.55 KB 28 bytes (0%)
yarn-[version].js 3.86 MB 3.86 MB 396 bytes (0%)
yarn-legacy-[version].js 4.01 MB 4.01 MB 396 bytes (0%)
yarn-v[version].tar.gz 891.26 KB 891.29 KB 36 bytes (0%)
yarn_[version]all.deb 667.97 KB 668.02 KB 56 bytes (0%)

1 similar comment
@buildsize
Copy link

buildsize bot commented Nov 25, 2017

This change will increase the build size from 10.26 MB to 10.26 MB, an increase of 912 bytes (0%)

File name Previous Size New Size Change
yarn-[version].noarch.rpm 886.52 KB 886.55 KB 28 bytes (0%)
yarn-[version].js 3.86 MB 3.86 MB 396 bytes (0%)
yarn-legacy-[version].js 4.01 MB 4.01 MB 396 bytes (0%)
yarn-v[version].tar.gz 891.26 KB 891.29 KB 36 bytes (0%)
yarn_[version]all.deb 667.97 KB 668.02 KB 56 bytes (0%)

@agoldis
Copy link
Contributor

agoldis commented Dec 5, 2017

@sharno I have noticed your PR and wonder if it can affect #5032? Any chance you take few minutes to take a look?

@blink1073
Copy link

Thanks for this @sharno! I prefer this approach to fix #4266 over the one I proposed in #4820.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants