-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
Check/fix problems with npm configuration #938
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
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
The "Check npm" template provides actions and a GitHub Actions workflow used to check for problems with a project's npm configuration files. In addition to the `package.json` file previously used, we are now using an `.npmrc` configuration file. It will be useful to have some validation for this file. npm provides a `config fix` command which automatically fixes any problems that are detected with the npm configuration. In addition to using it for that purpose, it can also serve as a check by running the command via the GitHub Actions workflow, then checking for any diff. Beyond the automated fixes, it is hoped that the parsing of the configuration that npm must perform to check for any needed fixes provides a basic validation of the configuration. Unfortunately npm's parser is extremely lenient, so the validation is not at all comprehensive. However, it is probably better than nothing, simple to implement, and no alternatives were found.
@per1234
per1234
added
type: enhancement
Proposed improvement
topic: infrastructure
Related to project infrastructure
labels
Sep 12, 2025
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #938 +/- ## ======================================= Coverage 83.33% 83.33% ======================================= Files 1 1 Lines 180 180 ======================================= Hits 150 150 Misses 19 19 Partials 11 11
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The "Check npm" template provides actions and a GitHub Actions workflow used to check for problems with a project's npm configuration files.
In addition to the
package.json
file previously used, we are now using an.npmrc
configuration file. It will be useful to have some validation for this file. npm provides aconfig fix
command which automatically fixes any problems that are detected with the npm configuration. In addition to using it for that purpose, it can also serve as a check by running the command via the GitHub Actions workflow, then checking for any diff.Beyond the automated fixes, it is hoped that the parsing of the configuration that npm must perform to check for any needed fixes provides a basic validation of the configuration. Unfortunately npm's parser is extremely lenient, so the validation is not at all comprehensive. However, it is probably better than nothing, simple to implement, and no alternatives were found.