|
| 1 | +#### Meeting from: January 26th, 2022 |
| 2 | + |
| 3 | +# Open RFC Meeting (npm) |
| 4 | + |
| 5 | +### Attendees |
| 6 | +- Darcy Clarke (@darcyclarke) |
| 7 | +- Ruy Adorno (@ruyadorno) |
| 8 | +- Nathan Fritz (@fritzy) |
| 9 | +- Owen Buckley (@thescientist13) |
| 10 | + |
| 11 | +### Previously... |
| 12 | + |
| 13 | +- [2022-01-19](https://github.com/npm/rfcs/blob/main/meetings/2022-01-19.md) |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +### Agenda |
| 16 | + |
| 17 | +1. **Housekeeping** |
| 18 | + 1. Introduction(s) |
| 19 | + 1. [Code of Conduct Acknowledgement](https://www.npmjs.com/policies/conduct) |
| 20 | + 1. Outline Intentions & Desired Outcomes |
| 21 | + 1. Announcements |
| 22 | + - OpenJS World 2022 |
| 23 | + - https://events.linuxfoundation.org/openjs-world/ |
| 24 | + - CFP: https://events.linuxfoundation.org/openjs-world/program/cfp/ |
| 25 | +1. **PR**: [#516 RFC: Deprecated packages UX revamp](https://github.com/npm/rfcs/pull/516) - @ruyadorno |
| 26 | + - @ruyadorno |
| 27 | + - last step in cleaning up `npm install` output |
| 28 | + - this has been outstanding for quite a while |
| 29 | + - deprecation warnings can be consolidated (making them less scary) |
| 30 | + - suggest bubbling up this information in a different command like `npm ls`, `npm explain` or `npm outdated` |
| 31 | + - suggest scoping this under a command `npm deprecations` but not super attached to this |
| 32 | + - @fritzy |
| 33 | + - immediate thought, don't think we need a dedicated command or global flag |
| 34 | + - when something is installed global, we probably don't care about dev dependency |
| 35 | + - @darcyclarke |
| 36 | + - instead of removing the log messages, maybe just change the level of logging to something that would not be printed during a standard install |
| 37 | + - also add visual feedback to `npm outdated` |
| 38 | + - not sure about adding info to `npm explain`, if we were to do that we should pb augment explain output to add audit info, etc |
| 39 | + - @lukekarrys |
| 40 | + - maybe keep direct dependencies as warning logs during install? |
| 41 | + - security audits, deprecations and outdated seem to be very similar, what if there's a command that can surface all this info? |
| 42 | + - @darcyclarke |
| 43 | + - if we were to keep warning for direct dependencies why would we not have log warnings for audit reports for direct deps? |
| 44 | + - @ruyadorno |
| 45 | + - idea is to have a unified notifications system at the end instead |
| 46 | + - @darcyclarke |
| 47 | + - `npm ls` can also be a bit of a scope creep in the context of this RFC since you could also argue it can also be augmented to include audit issues and more |
| 48 | + - @ruyadorno |
| 49 | + - let's maybe reduce the scope to only notifications and a command to surface the deprecation messages |
| 50 | + - @darcyclarke |
| 51 | + - the command `npm deprecations`? just returns direct dependencies by default and accepts `--all` flag in order to show deprecations for transitive deps |
| 52 | +3. **PR**: [#4260 feat(arborist)(reify): add an ability to add a hook](https://github.com/npm/cli/pull/4260) - @fritzy |
| 53 | + - @darcyclarke |
| 54 | + - During the npm7 rewrite the hooks feature was dropped |
| 55 | + - Maybe that wasn't as well publicized like other breaking changes such as peer dependencies |
| 56 | + - There's a current RFC to add new lifecycle events for arborist / npm installs |
| 57 | +5. **Issue**: [#511 [RRFC] remove `npm-shrinkwrap.json` from the list of unignorable files](https://github.com/npm/rfcs/issues/511) - @ljharb |
| 58 | + - Update: need to action on the items from last week |
| 59 | +6. **PR**: [#4227 Change the default save-prefix from ^ to none](https://github.com/npm/cli/pull/4227) - @zkldi |
| 60 | + - Update: need to action on the items from last week |
| 61 | +7. **PR**: [#343 RFC: npm workspaces: auto switch context based on cwd](https://github.com/npm/rfcs/pull/343) - @ruyadorno |
| 62 | + - @ruyadorno |
| 63 | + - big gap between our current implementation & the way end-user's are expecting this feature to work |
| 64 | + - running a command within a directory that is apart of a workspace should be easier |
| 65 | + - we'll now walk up the require tree & determine if you're inside a workspace or not |
| 66 | + - @fritzy |
| 67 | + - PR that is open checks for if a workspace is defined at the root of the project |
| 68 | + - there's a way to opt-out from the behavior using `--no-workspaces` |
0 commit comments