[v22.x backport] module: add findPackageJSON util
#56494
Conversation
|
Review requested:
|
nodejs-github-bot
added
lib / src
|
Oh son of a…. Forgot that would break the PR. |
PR-URL: nodejs#55412 Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#55543 Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito <[email protected]>
PR-URL: nodejs#56382 Reviewed-By: Jordan Harband <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth <[email protected]>
JakobJingleheimer
force-pushed
the
22.x/findPackageJSON
branch
from
de1f993 to
5dbd319
Compare
|
@ruyadorno could this land soon before more conflicts arise? |
| > supersedes it, and a loader hook supersedes that). | ||
|
|
||
| > **Caveat**: This currently leverages only the built-in default resolver; if | ||
| > [`resolve` customization hooks][resolve hook] are registered, they will not affect the resolution. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
[resolve hook] here does not exist in 22.x, but it did in main, so it's not in the cherry-pick. @nodejs/releasers should I do to fix it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
well, in these cases you might need to manually amend a commit to add / remove
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In this specific case it looks like the right way to go about it is to insert the missing resolve hook link as part of the same commit that introduces this patch. Assuming that resolve hooks are actually available on the v22.x release line of course.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How should I go about that technically: that would no-longer be a cherry-picked commit.
I assume I would amend the commit, which would create a fresh hash. But I want to be sure, because that's a quasi-destructive action.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Its ok if its a different hash, it is a different commit infact. The info is in the metadata of the commit
PR-URL: #55412
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Antoine du Hamel [email protected]
PR-URL: #55543
Reviewed-By: Jacob Smith [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Marco Ippolito [email protected]
PR-URL: #56382
Reviewed-By: Jordan Harband [email protected]
Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth [email protected]