Remove direct links to Polyfill[dot]io #5127
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
1 task
owenatgov
reviewed
Jul 11, 2024
Removes all comments which link to Polyfill[dot]io or the defunct GitHub repo. In their place, add a README explaining the situation. Adding a note to each polyfill generates a LOAD of comments in package code, which isn't great.
domoscargin
force-pushed
the
bk-remove-polyfill-links
branch
from
a5eba82 to
059b6bb
Compare
|
@owenatgov I've smooshed ALL related comments now, and added a CHANGELOG entry rather than manually edit the Note for future releasers: the diff to the |
owenatgov
approved these changes
Jul 12, 2024
1 task
Merged
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Closes #5105
The included note bulked out the package code considerably (see #dcf4810), so I've gone with a single README in the polyfill folder.
If we wanted to include the note in the code itself, we could add a version of it to
src/all.mjs. Then it'd only be included once. But that felt a bit misplaced.To propagate the changes to the
distandpackagefolders, we'd need to do a patch release. I considered just manually updating these and skipping the CHANGELOG entry, but this seems more transparent, despite being more hassle.