add npm-template-copy bin #37
Conversation
fritzy
force-pushed
the
fritzy/bin-copy
branch
from
f3ca7b7 to
8c4ee51
Compare
fritzy
force-pushed
the
fritzy/bin-copy
branch
from
8c4ee51 to
e0391af
Compare
nlf
left a comment
nlf
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these changes are all clearly functional. i do want to push back (albeit lightly) on adding the template-copy script to everything though, it feels like overkill to me.
another approach that literally just came into my head, maybe npm-template-check can accept a --fix or --repair option or something and that can serve the place of this new bin? then reapplying the templates could be npm run postlint -- --fix and we don't need to add a new script to make it easily reachable. thoughts?
|
|
||
| config.paths.push(root) | ||
|
|
||
| config.force = process.argv.indexOf('--force') !== -1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
total nit, but process.argv.includes('--force') is shorter and more clear (i think)
| scripts: { | ||
| lint: `eslint '**/*.js'`, | ||
| postlint: 'npm-template-check', | ||
| 'template-copy': 'npm-template-copy --force', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
do we want to add this script to everything? are we re-applying templates enough that it's necessary?
|
|
||
| const patchPackage = async (path, root, config) => { | ||
| const pkg = await PackageJson.load(path) | ||
| config = config || {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
another total nit, but this might be more readable if the function definition just sets a default (assuming we're not passing an explicit falsey value anywhere that this is working around, anyway)
2 participants
Packages using template-oss can now manually invoke copying template files, regardless of template-oss matching.
npm run template-copy