Directly require() PrairieLib files instead of using it as a package #4411
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add exclusions to replace_paths.py Restrict replacements to .js files Handle special cases for prairielib require() Fix up bare relative path in server.js Rename to tools/replace_prairielib_paths.py Make script executable
nwalters512
approved these changes
Jun 24, 2021
It's the external monolith/micro-services tradeoff!
Thanks! |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Now that PrairieLib is directly in the monorepo, this PR changes all files to directly
require()files from./prairielib/rather than using them via the@prairielearn/prairielibpackage.The conversion here is done by creating the script
tools/replace_prairielib_paths.pyand then running it. The script itself does all the conversions to other files.The advantage of using PrairieLib files directly is that: