docs: mention bun.lock for lockfile
#20210
Conversation
docs/guide/dep-pre-bundling.md
Outdated
| @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ You can further customize esbuild too with the [`optimizeDeps.esbuildOptions` op | |||
|
|
|||
| Vite caches the pre-bundled dependencies in `node_modules/.vite`. It determines whether it needs to re-run the pre-bundling step based on a few sources: | |||
|
|
|||
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lockb`. | |||
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `bun.lock` or `bun.lockb`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `bun.lock` or `bun.lockb`. | |
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lock` |
Since this list is just an example, I think it's fine to remove bun.lockb because bun.lock has been added instead.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In that case, this PR is irrelevant because it's just an example. Either keep both or close this PR in my opinion
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@sapphi-red , @WarningImHack3r , with respect I want to tell one thing if you allow. I have seen in the codebase that both bun.lock and bun.lockb are present. Can't we add both here also then ?
vite/packages/vite/src/node/optimizer/index.ts
Line 1231 in 3bf3a8a
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Having both feels too verbose. Since bun.lock is the new default for bun, I think bun.lock should be listed instead of bun.lockb.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I see. Thank you for your opinion, @sapphi-red .
|
My opinion hasn’t changed from #20210 (comment). |
|
@sapphi-red sure, no problem. Then you may merge it what you feel better. |
You need to remove |
|
@WarningImHack3r , With respect I want to tell you one thing. Personally I do not know you and I do not like the way you talk. I have seen from the very first time you are sharply demotivating and discouraging me. I am not a very big and top-notch developer in the world like you. I am very novice and small person. I am learning and I find developers like @sapphi-red my inspiration in life who I follow and admire. And @sapphi-red merged my many small PRs before also. If a small person like me can contribute even if a small thing in Vite, then I feel very happy if it is correct. You need not to say that the PR will only remove the word |
![graphite-app[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/158384?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ You can further customize esbuild too with the [`optimizeDeps.esbuildOptions` op | |||
|
|
|||
| Vite caches the pre-bundled dependencies in `node_modules/.vite`. It determines whether it needs to re-run the pre-bundling step based on a few sources: | |||
|
|
|||
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lockb`. | |||
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lock`. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The PR replaces bun.lockb with bun.lock when both formats should be listed. According to Bun's documentation, both lockfile formats are supported:
bun.lock- the human-readable format (default since v1.2)bun.lockb- the binary format
The line should include both options:
-- Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lockb`.
+- Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `bun.lock`, or `bun.lockb`.| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml` or `bun.lock`. | |
| - Package manager lockfile content, e.g. `package-lock.json`, `yarn.lock`, `pnpm-lock.yaml`, `bun.lock`, or `bun.lockb`. |
Spotted by Diamond
Is this helpful? React 👍 or 👎 to let us know.
|
Sorry if I looked disrespectful to you, it wasn’t at all my point My first comment was addressed to sapphire, I was on your side from the very beginning As for my last comment, I was just pointing out what you needed to do in order to get an approval from sapphire, which you didn’t seem to get at first Anyway, I just wanted to give my opinion in the first place and I ended up getting subscribed to this PR; I’m leaving both of you deciding what you want, I don’t really care what the outcome for this is going to be Sorry again and bye |
bun generates
bun.lockby default from bun v1.2. I think may be here we may addbun.lockwithbun.lockbas well.https://bun.sh/docs/install/lockfile