Skip to content
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

Bump BlueprintJS to v5 #275

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Mar 2, 2024
Merged

Bump BlueprintJS to v5 #275

merged 9 commits into from
Mar 2, 2024

Conversation

RichDom2185
Copy link
Member

Description

The frontend has been updated to Blueprint v5 in source-academy/frontend#2718.

I've done a quick check so far and it doesn't seem to be the case that any of the modules in our codebase depend on changes that are broken when moving from v4 → v5.

(Though we should move soon to prevent this possibility)


I'm removing the deprecated @blueprintjs/popover2 in source-academy/frontend#2773. But modules still depend on it.

Thus I'm removing @blueprintjs/popover2 as external in our build options.

In reality, @blueprintjs/popover2 just re-exports components from @blueprintjs/core (at least, for the newer versions of the library) so it shouldn't be needed at all and we should proceed to bump Blueprint and remove this package from modules as well.

In the meantime, this is a hotfix to ensure existing modules keep working.

Type of change

Please delete options that are not relevant.

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • This change requires a documentation update

Checklist:

  • My code follows the style guidelines of this project
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code

@leeyi45
Copy link
Contributor

leeyi45 commented Feb 17, 2024

If @blueprintjs/popover2 just reexports components, would it be too much to migrate the modules that still rely on it?

@RichDom2185
Copy link
Member Author

If @blueprintjs/popover2 just reexports components, would it be too much to migrate the modules that still rely on it?

We'd have to bump modules to Blueprint 5 first (in the Blueprint 4 series of packages, they are still different components) – but okay, I'll work on it since the frontend PR is not merged yet anyway.

Replaces usage of components from @blueprintjs/popover2 with their
corresponding components from @blueprintjs/core.
Copy link
Member Author

@RichDom2185 RichDom2185 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It has come to my attention that the codebase has a lot of inconsistencies with regards to the use of single/double quotes, and tabs/spaces, as well as potentially other things.

This is likely due to the different ESLint configs and them being set to "warn" instead of "error". I guess I'll revive my #241 PR and try to reformat all these for consistency.

@leeyi45
Copy link
Contributor

leeyi45 commented Feb 17, 2024

It has come to my attention that the codebase has a lot of inconsistencies with regards to the use of single/double quotes, and tabs/spaces, as well as potentially other things.

This is likely due to the different ESLint configs and them being set to "warn" instead of "error". I guess I'll revive my #241 PR and try to reformat all these for consistency.

Are these not being caught by the CI?

@RichDom2185
Copy link
Member Author

It has come to my attention that the codebase has a lot of inconsistencies with regards to the use of single/double quotes, and tabs/spaces, as well as potentially other things.
This is likely due to the different ESLint configs and them being set to "warn" instead of "error". I guess I'll revive my #241 PR and try to reformat all these for consistency.

Are these not being caught by the CI?

Nope they're not, also seems that yarn build and yarn lint did not catch the above error that was caught when doing yarn build --tsc --lint in the CI.

@leeyi45
Copy link
Contributor

leeyi45 commented Feb 17, 2024

It has come to my attention that the codebase has a lot of inconsistencies with regards to the use of single/double quotes, and tabs/spaces, as well as potentially other things.
This is likely due to the different ESLint configs and them being set to "warn" instead of "error". I guess I'll revive my #241 PR and try to reformat all these for consistency.

Are these not being caught by the CI?

Nope they're not, also seems that yarn build and yarn lint did not catch the above error that was caught when doing yarn build --tsc --lint in the CI.

Hmm this one's on me then. commander released a new typescript package, it's time for me to relook at the script code again

@RichDom2185 RichDom2185 changed the title Explicitly state externalized Blueprint packages Bump BlueprintJS to v5 Feb 17, 2024
@RichDom2185
Copy link
Member Author

It has come to my attention that the codebase has a lot of inconsistencies with regards to the use of single/double quotes, and tabs/spaces, as well as potentially other things.
This is likely due to the different ESLint configs and them being set to "warn" instead of "error". I guess I'll revive my #241 PR and try to reformat all these for consistency.

Are these not being caught by the CI?

Nope they're not, also seems that yarn build and yarn lint did not catch the above error that was caught when doing yarn build --tsc --lint in the CI.

Hmm this one's on me then. commander released a new typescript package, it's time for me to relook at the script code again

Perhaps we can simply remove lint from the scripts, and use (in package.json):

{
  // ...
  "scripts": {
    // ...
    "lint": "eslint . --ext ts,tsx --report-unused-disable-directives --max-warnings 0"
  }
}

since we don't require complex functionality for linting?

@RichDom2185 RichDom2185 mentioned this pull request Feb 18, 2024
12 tasks
@leeyi45
Copy link
Contributor

leeyi45 commented Feb 25, 2024

The reason why it's like this is because I wanted to run everything in parallel. I'm currently working on refactoring the code to ensure it's correctness

@RichDom2185 RichDom2185 merged commit 96ab861 into master Mar 2, 2024
3 checks passed
@RichDom2185 RichDom2185 deleted the externalize-hotfix branch March 2, 2024 05:07
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.

2 participants