Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
fix: Removed bundled types entirely due to 3rd party build errors
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@cure53
cure53 committed Aug 24, 2022
1 parent caaae5e commit 652d200
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 4 changed files with 3 additions and 293 deletions.
144 changes: 0 additions & 144 deletions dist/purify.cjs.d.ts
View file

This file was deleted.

144 changes: 0 additions & 144 deletions dist/purify.es.d.ts
View file

This file was deleted.

4 changes: 1 addition & 3 deletions package.json
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -15,8 +15,7 @@
"test:jsdom": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test BABEL_ENV=rollup node test/jsdom-node-runner --dot",
"test:karma": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test BABEL_ENV=rollup karma start test/karma.conf.js --log-level warn ",
"test:ci": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test BABEL_ENV=rollup npm run test:jsdom && npm run test:karma -- --log-level error --reporters dots --single-run --shouldTestOnBrowserStack=\"${TEST_BROWSERSTACK}\" --shouldProbeOnly=\"${TEST_PROBE_ONLY}\"",
"test": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test BABEL_ENV=rollup npm run lint && npm run test:jsdom && npm run test:karma -- --browsers Chrome",
"types": "npx -p typescript tsc dist/purify.cjs.js dist/purify.es.js --declaration --allowJs --emitDeclarationOnly --outDir dist"
"test": "cross-env NODE_ENV=test BABEL_ENV=rollup npm run lint && npm run test:jsdom && npm run test:karma -- --browsers Chrome"
},
"main": "dist/purify.cjs.js",
"module": "dist/purify.es.js",
Expand All @@ -27,7 +26,6 @@
"pre-commit": [
"lint",
"build",
"types",
"commit-amend-build"
],
"xo": {
Expand Down
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions scripts/commit-amend-build.sh
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,3 +1,3 @@
echo "# Amending minified assets & types to HEAD"
echo "# Amending minified assets to HEAD"

git add ./dist/purify.js ./dist/purify.js.map ./dist/purify.min.js ./dist/purify.min.js.map ./dist/purify.cjs.js ./dist/purify.cjs.js.map ./dist/purify.cjs.d.ts ./dist/purify.es.js ./dist/purify.es.js.map ./dist/purify.es.d.ts
git add ./dist/purify.js ./dist/purify.js.map ./dist/purify.min.js ./dist/purify.min.js.map ./dist/purify.cjs.js ./dist/purify.cjs.js.map ./dist/purify.es.js ./dist/purify.es.js.map

5 comments on commit 652d200

@kkomelin
Copy link

@kkomelin kkomelin commented on 652d200 Aug 25, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cure53 I think this project may benefit from following semantic versioning (

@cure53
Copy link
Owner Author

@cure53 cure53 commented on 652d200 Aug 25, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not listening to half-qualified advice from 3rd parties when attempting to fix other people's tech problems would have helped this project even more.

@kkomelin
Copy link

@kkomelin kkomelin commented on 652d200 Aug 25, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@cure53 That 3rd-party is your active user who recommends the project to others quite often and uses it for all clients projects.
That's rough but I accept it.

@cure53
Copy link
Owner Author

@cure53 cure53 commented on 652d200 Aug 25, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not meant to hurt you personally (apologies if it did), but looking at the ticket history of this not-so-optimal situation, it's quite clear that we started off with high motivation to help, admitted it's not our strongest area of knowledge to work on, asked for advice, got advice, implemented that advice and then - sirens in the distance.

In the end, lots of hours of our and other people's work were wasted for zero effect and then getting an "I think this project may benefit from following semantic versioning (" adds on top of the already significant frustration on how this went - because it does not describe the situation accurately.

Bad decisions were made on all involved ends including our own, no doubt about that - but I don't think that semantic versioning would have solved any issues here, the issue was lack of expertise on how to do it right on all involved ends, again including our own.

@kkomelin
Copy link

@kkomelin kkomelin commented on 652d200 Aug 25, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @cure53 I understand your frustration about this issue.
My comment came at the wrong time and I didn't elaborate my idea enough. My bad.
Anyway, please keep up the great job with the project despite such dark moments.

Please sign in to comment.