-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
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
Using yarn but ignoring lockfile #95
Comments
Seems broken, see bahmutov/npm-install#95
@bahmutov - is this by design or can I open an MR to address this? |
I have opened a pull request which hopefully addresses this issue. Let me know how it goes! |
Hopefully fixing bahmutov/npm-install#95 and thus failing CI due to the `socket.io` issue, as npm does take `resolutions` into account.
@YenHub Thanks for tackling this! I have finally tried this, but still see the same (wrong) behavior (see https://github.com/kaliber5/ember-stargate/pull/322/checks?check_run_id=3905655494#step:4:40). However it seems to me the action is not actually using the latest code, as the Another point: I think for the lockfile to be ignored,
|
Thanks @simonihmig for your update RE: const args = shouldUsePackageLock ? ['--frozen-lockfile'] : ['--no-lockfile'] Where an empty array is passed into You effectively end up with:- return exec.exec(quote(yarnPath), [], options) |
I understand that, but the default behavior of |
Given a project with a
yarn.lock
and calling the action withuseLockFile: false
, I was surprised that it actually runsnpm install
, instead ofyarn --no-lockfile
. I would have expected the latter.This seems to be intentional, looking at this code, but I wonder why?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: