zkochan on v7
fix(core): don't try to read th… chore(deps): update chore(release): @email@example.com and 1 more (compare)
zkochan on main
chore(release): @firstname.lastname@example.org (compare)
zkochan on main
fix(core): don't try to read th… chore(deps): update (compare)
readPkg.ts, normalizing the version property
1.0.0in the project's
email@example.com now it would be a good time for a rename
Kat from npm has gave me some ideas how to make pnpm faster. It will require some breaking changes to the store structure. It is really interesting what the outcome will be
Also they are considering to use some of the things pnpm introduced. Like adding unpacked packages to the npm cache and using hard links instead of copying packages from cache.
pnpm iand there're already installed some dependencies which contain git-repositories or linked via simlink from another local dir?
pnpm i. you mean that this would be reinstalled even if version is ok? I'm asking 2-3 because of in my workflow I often do
npm i ~/some/local-depor
npm i nickname/package, for example, my own packages.
npmunderstands this and don't touch them when I do
npm iwithout arguments.
yes, even then it will reinstall them because pnpm guarantees that the node_modules structure will always look the same. It doesn't matter in what sequence you run commands.
the node_modules structure created by npm is not compatible with the one created by pnpm, so pnpm has to remove folder created by pnpm.
I often do npm i ~/some/local-dep or npm i nickname/package, for example, my own packages. npm understands this and don't touch them when I do npm i without arguments.
if you will just use pnpm for these actions, it will behave the same as npm
npm@2since I'm not glad with what they do in newer versions and how they help with my troubles. So I'm definetily think your work is essential. I will try pnpm.