extension-examples
extension-examples copied to clipboard
looker-open-source
Add a script to keep all extensions dependency versions in line
update.sh can be used to loop through every extension in the repository and update a specified package to a specified version.
Example usage from root of repo"
./update.sh -p @looker/sdk -v 21.0.7
This would update the package (-p) @looker/sdk to version (-v) 21.0.7 across all extensions. I think that last bit is desirable because it makes things uniform, but if that's not the case I can add in some selection criteria.
I thought about making it fast by just editing the text of package.json, but I think it is useful to actually run the yarn add command to make sure the version exists, see if there are errors, etc. (not to mention prep the extensions to actually be tested). It takes ~240s to run across the repo in its current state.
I imagine the flow to do updates will be something like
git clone [email protected]:looker-open-source/extension-examples.git
cd extension-examples
git checkout -b izzy/bump-looker-sdk-2107
./update.sh -p @looker/sdk -v 21.0.7
git add .
git commit -m "bumped @looker/sdk to 21.0.7"
git push
idk how to bash so if this short script in fact raises the dead please let me know.
oh and just a note on the find behavior— It looks for directories that are not node_modules that contain a *.lock file. Felt like a reasonable heuristic for an extension directory, and better than some stackoverflow suggested solutions regarding maxdepth and stuff.
feature request / next up would be to supply an array / dict to do multiple at once!
I was actually thinking of writing something in javascript or typescript. Basically inputs would be some JS config object that mimics directory structure (down to react/typescript/javascript) . Each node would contain dev dependencies and dependences. The script would just run through the file system looking for package.json and entries based upon config.
My bash scripting skills suck so I normally avoid it like the plague. As an interim solution its okay but copying Jax as I suspect his bash skills are a lot better than mine.
This is a great first cut. As @bryans99 says, I think using Node for the entire thing would be more sustainable and readable rather than calling a yarn util via the bash script. However, I wonder if something could be readily extracted/applied from release-please for this. @joeldodge79 thoughts?
Ha you'll never guess what I wrote before I remembered "hmm, I think Bryn said it should be a bash script?" and started figuring out how to bash.
I'll put up another PR with the node TS script that does more or less what you described.
"hmm, I think Bryn said it should be a bash script?"
I hope I didn't say that, but if I did I apologize. Probably my brain not communicating with my mouth :D
Just thinking about approach for a second... The node script I wrote does exactly the same thing as this script, which isn't what @bryans99 described.
I'm not sure I follow why we would want to provide as input a js object that mimics the entire directory structure of the repo. Wouldn't that be sort of equivalent work to just going thru the repo and editing each package.json, one by one? You'd just be doing that editing in one file, but the same number of keys/values would need to be changed.
I quite liked the idea of just providing {"package": x, "version": y} and having that apply to all package.jsons, since it really minimizes the maintenance work required.
I realize we'd have to make sure all extension examples here were kept up to date with the same versions... but that seems like sort of a good housekeeping practice anyway. Am I missing something neat about your suggestion?
Main reason for the input block is that some examples do not need ALL of the packages. For example, typescript not needed javascript. react and extension react sdk not needed by non react examples.
Makes sense!
On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 11:58 AM Bryn Ryans @.***> wrote:
Main reason for the input block is that some examples do not need ALL of the packages. For example, typescript not needed javascript. react and extension react sdk not needed by non react examples.
— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/looker-open-source/extension-examples/pull/15#issuecomment-830308957, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIUAGMYK2IHXIHLQ4KOAFILTLL4U3ANCNFSM433BZRGA .
--
• Izzy Miller
• Developer Relations Engineer l Looker
• 415.298.4687 <(415)298-4687>
• @.***
For the codegen repo, we update the Looker release version constant by using a regex pattern and replacing it. If this is a package.json tweak, you could just match the target dependencies and replace them with the new version ref.