Datahub show takes too long to build

[risenW]

This is can be attributed to the following:

• Using npx create-next-app portal -e ${portalGithubRepo} command to pull repo. We should go back to cloning with GitHub since the example is already a Nextjs app.
• Portaljs example app is too big and contains unnecessary files and folders
• Building in production mode when the user runs datahub show. Building for production mode is slower because of the optimizations Nextjs does.
• npx create-next-app command conflicts with yarn which is our default package manager. Hence two lock files are generated and the build fails
• We should create a separate repo for the portal example, and use git clone instead of npx. This is very fast and will run in seconds compared to npx which runs in minutes.

Acceptance

• [x] Set npm as default package manager ==> Fixed https://github.com/datopian/portal.js/pull/647
• [x] Make the example app smaller by removing unnecessary folders and files like the test folder ==> Fixed: https://github.com/datopian/portal.js/pull/648
• [ ] Use a separated repo for example, and change npx command to use git clone.
• [ ] When a user runs datahub show, we should build and server in development mode. This is quicker
• [ ] When the user runs datahub build, by default we build in dev mode unless the argument --production is set.
• [ ] When a user runs datahub deploy, then the build system can run the production build and handle deployment.

[risenW]

@anuveyatsu Some issues I noticed. Since the change to using npx create-next-app in the CLI cmds, builds have been failing. From my end, and also when I tested with Leo. It's because of multiple .lock files being generated since we are using yarn as default.

I am sending a PR to change the default package manager to npm. Fixed: https://github.com/datopian/portal.js/pull/647

[risenW]

@anuveyatsu What are your thoughts on acceptance criteria 3 above?

[rufuspollock]

WONTFIX. We aren't pursuing the CLI approach for now (datahub show etc).