Remove PropertyDDS packages which are not depended on by PropertyDDS

[CraigMacomber]

Description

Deletes some packages from experimental/PropertyDDS.

The DDS and its dependencies are kept, but the rest of its packages are not.

Delete the following published experimental packages:

• @fluid-experimental/property-shared-tree-interop
• @fluid-experimental/property-binder
• @fluid-experimental/property-proxy
• @fluid-experimental/property-inspector-table

Delete the following private packages:

• @fluid-example/property-inspector
• @fluid-example/schemas

Changes made by deleting the packages, then running:

pnpm i --no-frozen-lockfile
pnpm layer-check --md .

and manually adding a changeset.

Breaking Changes

These packages will no longer be published:

• @fluid-experimental/property-shared-tree-interop
• @fluid-experimental/property-binder
• @fluid-experimental/property-proxy
• @fluid-experimental/property-inspector-table

Reviewer Guidance

The review process is outlined on this wiki page.

[msfluid-bot]

⯅ @fluid-example/bundle-size-tests: +245 Bytes

Metric Name	Baseline Size	Compare Size	Size Diff
aqueduct.js	461.15 KB	461.18 KB	⯅ +35 Bytes
azureClient.js	559.19 KB	559.24 KB	⯅ +49 Bytes
connectionState.js	680 Bytes	680 Bytes	■ No change
containerRuntime.js	261.99 KB	262 KB	⯅ +14 Bytes
fluidFramework.js	400.11 KB	400.12 KB	⯅ +14 Bytes
loader.js	134.26 KB	134.28 KB	⯅ +14 Bytes
map.js	42.39 KB	42.39 KB	⯅ +7 Bytes
matrix.js	146.56 KB	146.56 KB	⯅ +7 Bytes
odspClient.js	526.47 KB	526.52 KB	⯅ +49 Bytes
odspDriver.js	97.72 KB	97.74 KB	⯅ +21 Bytes
odspPrefetchSnapshot.js	42.78 KB	42.79 KB	⯅ +14 Bytes
sharedString.js	163.26 KB	163.26 KB	⯅ +7 Bytes
sharedTree.js	390.62 KB	390.63 KB	⯅ +7 Bytes
Total Size	3.3 MB	3.3 MB	⯅ +245 Bytes

---

Baseline commit: 84b5c4e6ae9209b7e2c780ba14e2fc64f4151fbe

Generated by :no_entry_sign: dangerJS against cba5f8de5814ab1d3de5a8bb2ab152856c7746b4

[tylerbutler]

Obligatory question: were you able to check with partners to see if this change would impact them?

[CraigMacomber]

Obligatory question: were you able to check with partners to see if this change would impact them?

Last Wednesday in our sync they were asked if they had any reason not to do this (and they didn't), and I'm giving them a week find any reasons they could not think of at the time. Should I receive no opposition by tomorrow by tomorrow, I think it makes sense to go ahead with this removal. None of these packages have been actively maintained, and I confirmed the two main customers have their own forks/alternatives to property inspector table which the independently maintain and would not be impacted by this one being removed. As for the other packages, no on expressed any opinions yet, which means no reason to keep them.

We can of course restore these packages is needed, though at that point I'd suggest who ever needed them actively maintain the package, and prefer they be restored to a different repository unless there is a good reason they need to be in this one.

[CraigMacomber]

Autodesk has requested a 2-3 day timeline extension to finish reviewing their use of these packages. moving the expected date for proceeding with this back to ~ Friday.

Edit: Got the go-ahead from Autodesk. Will merge.

[github-actions[bot]]

🔗 No broken links found! ✅

Your attention to detail is admirable.

linkcheck output

> [email protected] ci:linkcheck /home/runner/work/FluidFramework/FluidFramework/docs
> start-server-and-test ci:start 1313 linkcheck:full

1: starting server using command "npm run ci:start"
and when url "[ 'http://127.0.0.1:1313' ]" is responding with HTTP status code 200
running tests using command "npm run linkcheck:full"


> [email protected] ci:start
> http-server ./public --port 1313 --silent


> [email protected] linkcheck:full
> npm run linkcheck:fast -- --external


> [email protected] linkcheck:fast
> linkcheck http://localhost:1313 --skip-file skipped-urls.txt --external

Crawling...

Stats:
  378641 links
    2984 destination URLs
       2 URLs ignored
       0 warnings
       0 errors