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

fix(nm): takes into account scoped packages during syncing tree with disk #4266

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 25, 2022

Conversation

larixer
Copy link
Member

@larixer larixer commented Mar 25, 2022

What's the problem this PR addresses?

This is a follow-up PR to #3467. @merceyz noticed the performance regression, this was due to the #3467 didn't take into account scoped packages during syncing tree with disk and it resulted in the reinstallation of all the scoped packages each time.

How did you fix it?

Added handling scoped packages during syncing tree representation with disk contents and added an integration test.

Checklist

  • I have set the packages that need to be released for my changes to be effective.
  • I will check that all automated PR checks pass before the PR gets reviewed.

@larixer larixer requested a review from merceyz March 25, 2022 12:42
….test.ts

Co-authored-by: Kristoffer K. <merceyz@users.noreply.github.com>
@larixer larixer enabled auto-merge (squash) March 25, 2022 14:11
@larixer larixer disabled auto-merge March 25, 2022 14:45
@larixer larixer enabled auto-merge (squash) March 25, 2022 14:53
@larixer larixer merged commit b898b53 into master Mar 25, 2022
@larixer larixer deleted the larixer/disk-sync-scoped branch March 25, 2022 15:24
merceyz added a commit that referenced this pull request May 12, 2022
…disk (#4266)

* Takes into account scoped packages during syncing tree with disk

* Update packages/acceptance-tests/pkg-tests-specs/sources/node-modules.test.ts

Co-authored-by: Kristoffer K. <merceyz@users.noreply.github.com>

Co-authored-by: Kristoffer K. <merceyz@users.noreply.github.com>
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