Skip to content

chore: ignore yarn.lock file and update example #6588

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

shivarm
Copy link
Contributor

@shivarm shivarm commented Jun 23, 2025

When I used yarn then yarn.lock generated, our existing .npmrc working for npm and pnpm but for yarn we have to delete it after install.

This will allow us to use above package manager without conflict of lock files

Copy link
Member

@bjohansebas bjohansebas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't have a strong opinion here, since there's also devEngines and we could probably enforce using only npm.

@shivarm
Copy link
Contributor Author

shivarm commented Jun 25, 2025

I don't have a strong opinion here, since there's also devEngines and we could probably enforce using only npm.

I think devEngines will break the idea of using multiple packagemanager. But this will allow us to use any packagemanager since we are not pushing lockfile, so no conflicts.

@shivarm
Copy link
Contributor Author

shivarm commented Jun 26, 2025

This PR will not break anything, it will break when we were rely on lockfiles and we know pnpm and yarn both have their lockfiles but for npm and pnpm our configuration working, means lockfile not generating while dependencies install step, but for yarn it is not working.

Copy link
Member

@IamLizu IamLizu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don’t have a strong opinion here either – ignoring yarn.lock to avoid lockfile conflicts when using Yarn makes sense if we want true multi–package-manager support.

We could also explore enforcing a single manager via devEngines as @bjohansebas said, but that’d be a more restrictive approach.

Given that this change is harmless for npm/pnpm users and just skips committing the Yarn lockfile, I’m happy to approve.

@shivarm
Copy link
Contributor Author

shivarm commented Jun 27, 2025

We could also explore enforcing a single manager via devEngines as @bjohansebas said, but that’d be a more restrictive approach.

Yes, this will restrict the idea

@shivarm
Copy link
Contributor Author

shivarm commented Jul 6, 2025

@UlisesGascon WDYT?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants