Skip to content

Conversation

THEjacob1000
Copy link
Contributor

@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 commented Oct 14, 2025

Internal change only

Something annoying I noticed whilst updating this dep within ordering is that pinning this to a specific version can cause annoyances when attempting to update. I looked through the history of this repo and found comments in this PR: #29 stating that the only reason loke context wasn't a peer dep in the first place was due to the package only having a single version at the time. Currently, the only 2 versions published are 0.0.1 and 0.1.0 (src: npmjs), so I pinned the versions to being at least 0.0.1 and less than v1.

Blocking: https://github.com/LOKE/ordering/pull/295

Submitter Checklist

Check only those that apply to this change.

  • Self-reviewed code, removed extraneous comments, debug logging, checked code style
  • No change to users after merge (off-by-default configuration, feature flag, alt URL, etc.) and can be disabled if issues arise (if this is not the case we may need stakeholder signoff)
  • Changes are documented (README, wiki, etc)
  • Automated tests added or existing tests cover the new functionality or changes
  • Manually tested changes
  • Metrics added to track the usage/performance
  • I am confident I can revert this change
  • Database migrations are reversible without data loss (if applicable)
  • Performance impact is acceptable (if applicable)
  • Any new dependencies are justified or have been approved (if applicable)
  • This is NOT a high risk change (if it is, please follow the high-risk change process)

Testing Evidence

What evidence supports that you have tested this change?

  • Test cases cover the new functionality or changes
  • Screenshots or logs of the changes (if applicable)
  • Performance benchmarks (if applicable)
  • Storybook cases (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

Note: if this PR affects authentication or payments please seek a secondary tester.

  • I am ok with code style and functionality
  • I have personally tested the feature
  • My review was not rushed due to time constraints

@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 self-assigned this Oct 14, 2025
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this is the version used by the CI so it's the version I pinned it to to prevent a massive update to package-lock.json with the wrong npm version

@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 force-pushed the feature/convert-context-peerdep branch from 1e36b2e to d9a21c6 Compare October 14, 2025 23:42
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

typo in file name

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

essentially a copy / paste of the npm-publish workflow, except this one runs on PRs and won't publish the package

@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 force-pushed the feature/convert-context-peerdep branch from d9a21c6 to de61441 Compare October 14, 2025 23:54
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The lack of docs between different versions makes things much harder to figure out when bumping versions

@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 force-pushed the feature/convert-context-peerdep branch from de61441 to 8cf3786 Compare October 14, 2025 23:56
@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 requested review from a team and StevoLOKE and removed request for a team October 14, 2025 23:58
@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 force-pushed the feature/convert-context-peerdep branch from 8cf3786 to 50c185c Compare October 15, 2025 00:01
@THEjacob1000 THEjacob1000 requested review from a team and althoff0 and removed request for a team and StevoLOKE October 15, 2025 00:09
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.

1 participant