at it's heart, all
shrinkpack actually does is: crawl the npm-shrinkwrap.json dependency graph, copy into the project the tarballs which npm install downloads, then rewrite the paths in the dependency graph to point at those downloaded tarballs.
From my tests, this version should add support for git dependencies and scoped packages
Seems to work well now! Thanks @JamieMason .
some more progress on the refactor, should be a couple more days and hopefully most of the open issues will be addressed. Screenshot here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jvyp6ucbpjrerpb/Screen%20Shot%202016-04-13%20at%2000.04.47.png?dl=0
@JamieMason, just tried out
0.10 and it works perfect! Much faster as well. The only minor issue I have is that it errors if it doesn't do anything which makes my npm script fail, not a big deal but ideally this wouldn't be an error since it seems that shrinkpack has done it's job.
@JamieMason, thanks for this, it is just what I need.
It seems to me, though, that this commit (JamieMason/shrinkpack@409062c ) prevents us from re-running shrinkpack after adding a new dependency.
I thought I could workaround this by regenerating the shrinkwrap, but to my surprise the new npm-shrinkwrap.json contained 'resolved' properties pointing at './node_shrinkwrap'. Looking further into this I find that that resolution for the packages has found its way into the npm cache, probably as a result of running 'npm install' against a previously shrinkpacked project. I don't know what to do about this...
I'm not sure it seems to be 0.12.3
I confirm
Hi. I just discovered this tool. It's super interesting for what it should solve. I am just not sure how you deal with the new folder containing all these tgz files... is the idea to put all of them into Git? If that's true... wouldn't it bloat the size of the Git repository by same major amount over a few releases? (Maybe one can combine it with Git LFS, but then again there will be a dynamic download, right?)
Thanks @swernerx, that's right that the idea is to check them into Git. The zip files are very small but a few have mentioned that uncompressed tars will actually be more appropriate for Git, please see JamieMason/shrinkpack#40 where we'll likely add a
shrinkpack --uncompressed option.
As I get time I'm trying to improve the Documentation. So far there is just this new Tutorial in the Wiki but more will follow.
As in after running shrinkpack produce a .tgz using npm pack that can then be installed anywhere?
This however doesn't work. It seems like there is an assumption somewhere in the code that npm is running in the same directory that contains node_shrinkwrap.
Which isn't the case when installing an
npm pack produced file, rather than running from a git clone
The use case for this is installing on a production system that does not have access to the git repo(or any internet for that matter)
A workaround is to produce an archive of the git repo and transfer that to the target server, then running npm install in the resultant folder on the server
However I'm not sure if there are any important differences between an archive produced by
npm pack and an archive produced via git archive
Hi @Bucabug, sorry for the slow reply. Please could you raise a new issue which follows the bug reports section of the issue template? Thanks
"dependencies": {
"alrighty": {
"version": "1.0.0",
"from": "node_shrinkwrap/alrighty-1.0.0.tar",
"resolved": "./node_shrinkwrap/alrighty-1.0.0.tar"
},
...
}
After reading the tutorial, I would expect
from to be more like a npm semver string, rather than a path to node_shrinkwrap