Context

The recent pnpm 10.14 release introduces a new feature: devEngines.runtime,
allows declaring a JavaScript runtime (Node, Deno, Bun) in package.json.

Current recommended CI setup uses both actions/setup-node and pnpm/action-setup actions:

pnpm documentation

Use cache to reduce installation time

on:
 - push
 - pull_request
jobs:
 cache-and-install:
 runs-on: ubuntu-latest
 steps:
 - name: Checkout
 uses: actions/checkout@v4
 - uses: pnpm/action-setup@v4
 name: Install pnpm
 with:
 version: 10
 run_install: false
 - name: Install Node.js
 uses: actions/setup-node@v4
 with:
 node-version: 20
 cache: 'pnpm'
 - name: Install dependencies
 run: pnpm install

https://github.com/pnpm/action-setup?tab=readme-ov-file#notes

This action does not setup Node.js for you, use actions/setup-node yourself.

Questions

Given this new capability, I’d like to know whether using actions/setup-node in GitHub Actions workflows remains necessary,
or if pnpm@10.14 can fully handle runtime provisioning for CI environments:

If devEngines.runtime is used for Node.js from pnpm, does actions/setup-node become redundant?

Currently, setup-node offers functionality beyond installing Node, e.g.,
dependency caching (cache: pnpm), and handling authenticated registries.
If I rely solely on pnpm/setup-action I am losing these capabilities
Are there any plans for pnpm/action-setup to support similar features in the future?

Due to the state of devEngines support in actions/setup-node (pr in review: actions/setup-node#1283)
I don't have the chance to test how they behave together.
However, I’m curious how the new devEngines.runtime capability in pnpm
may affect the role pnpm/action-setup in GitHub Actions workflows. 😅

Thanks!