Hacker News new | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Update in ajv package broke webpack (github.com)
16 points by tyteen4a03 10 days ago | hide | past | web | favorite | 11 comments





I love how the thread immediately devolves into confusion over whether the way to fix the problem is to manage dependencies with npm or with yarn.

Never change, frontend community!


This is what happens when you don't pin your dependencies, right?

It's indeed a good reason for apps to pin their dependencies; those that did so presumably didn't have their builds broken by this issue. I don't feel that pinning dependencies necessarily makes a whole lot of sense for libraries, since it creates inflexibility and dependency duplication for app developers. But opinions vary.

Wouldn't we consider the way that most people use webpack to be as an app, not as a library?

No, because you declare it as a dependency.

Is this a novel definition of "library"? To me, library code is called by my code while my code is running. So, most libraries are dependencies, but lots of dependencies are not libraries. Test, code coverage, or documentation tools might be dependencies, or as npm would say instead devDependencies, but they are not libraries. Similarly, webpack is what we might call a build tool, which is also not a library.

I think it's just a semantic distinction, not a substantive one. The relevant thing is indeed that Webpack is generally used as part of another build process.

OK let's go with your definition. You're saying that "endpoints" may pin their dependencies, but any package that is depended upon by some other package should not in turn pin its own dependencies. ITT, I don't see support for this proposition. 'rigaspapas observed that the problems described in TFA could have been avoided through pinning. Presumably you're thinking of other problems that could be caused by pinning, but why would you think those problems are any worse than causing the program to completely fail to accomplish anything?

Not necessarily worse, but more common. Diamond dependencies happen a lot, especially in npm.

Diamonds are more common because node unlike many environments is absolutely tolerant of them. Maybe this "wastes" some disk space, but otherwise this is not a problem. It is orthogonal to actual problems like bugs in particular package versions.

This is why I have a global npm config flag to install the exact versions of packages. I think it’s a huge mistake to install “anything over X” versions or even have that as a feature.



Applications are open for YC Summer 2019

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: