feat: using npm-run-all -p to run scripts parallel #3100
Conversation
package.json
Outdated
| "partial-build": "node ./scripts/partialBuild", | ||
| "clean": "rimraf es/* src/* dist/* coverage/*", | ||
| "prepare": "npm run clean && npm run build", | ||
| "prepare": "npm-run-all --sequential clean build", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
While I understand the rationale for the change above, why do you think this is better than the && version? Do you just see greater consistency by always using npm-run-all, or is it that this version is more explicit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There's no advantage to use npm-run-all --sequential than && version, just looks consistent.
I have changed npm-run-all --sequential back to &&, and made test run spec and lint parallel.
package.json
Outdated
| "coverage": "BABEL_ENV=cjs nyc --reporter=lcov mocha -- --require @babel/register", | ||
| "lint": "eslint scripts/bookmarklet scripts/*.js source/*.js source/internal/*.js test/*.js test/**/*.js lib/sauce/*.js lib/bench/*.js", | ||
| "browser_test": "testem ci", | ||
| "spec": "cross-env BABEL_ENV=cjs mocha --require @babel/register --reporter spec", | ||
| "test": "npm run spec && npm run lint" | ||
| "test": "npm-run-all --sequential spec lint" |
|
@adispring: Do you have time to look into the build problems? (I manually resolved the |
|
This is a eslint problem: #2368 (comment) |
|
This PR(#3158) introduce |
customcommander
force-pushed
the
npm-run-all
branch
from
1765ff8
to
fc00e4a
Compare
This has been fixed in commit 56a36ec since then. @adispring I took the liberty to rebase your branch against ramda/master to fix that and a merge conflict with the lock file. Hope that's ok. |
|
@CrossEye: no changes since your last review other than the lock file needed to be regenerated. The rebase allowed to get the changes that fixed the linter errors. |
npm-run-all can run scripts parallel(or sequential), which can save some time.