Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Ship only production runtime files #378

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Ship only production runtime files #378

wants to merge 3 commits into from

Conversation

osher
Copy link

@osher osher commented May 5, 2024

this will reduce your on-disk node_modules footprint from ~500K to ~80K.

$ du -ahd 1 node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib
12.0K   node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/TSDocConfigFile.d.ts
4.0K    node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/index.js
4.0K    node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/TSDocConfigFile.d.ts.map
420.0K  node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/__tests__
4.0K    node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/index.d.ts
4.0K    node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/index.d.ts.map
28.0K   node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/TSDocConfigFile.js
4.0K    node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/index.js.map
44.0K   node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib/TSDocConfigFile.js.map
528.0K  node_modules/@microsoft/tsdoc-config/lib

I mean, good work with the tests and all, but don't ship them...

You also don't need to ship map files for ts.

P.S.
I would put more accurate numbers like I did for resolve - (which BTW affects you too!), but npm i fails...
I saw you use a different toolchain, but could not get started with this rush. all kinds of wierd errors... :P I had to give up.

@osher
Copy link
Author

osher commented May 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

oh. there's more diet to do...

28K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib-commonjs/__tests__ 
36K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib-commonjs/beta/__tests__ 
12K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib-commonjs/emitters/__tests__ 
120K    @microsoft/tsdoc/lib-commonjs/parser/__tests__ 
52K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib/__tests__ 
40K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib/beta/__tests__ 
20K     @microsoft/tsdoc/lib/emitters/__tests__ 
232K    @microsoft/tsdoc/lib/parser/__tests__

note that it's all shipped twice 😛 - just the __tests__ thingy

@osher
Copy link
Author

osher commented May 5, 2024

@microsoft-github-policy-service agree

@osher
Copy link
Author

osher commented May 13, 2024

@iclanton - the CI seems stuck... help?

@iclanton
Copy link
Member

@osher - I'll take a look this week.

@iclanton
Copy link
Member

You need to run rush change, and we should try to eliminate the .npmignore files if we're going to move to the "files" package.json field.

iclanton
iclanton reviewed May 28, 2024
View reviewed changes
tsdoc/package.json Outdated
Comment on lines 23 to 24
"lib-commonjs/*.js",
"lib-commonjs/*.js.map",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These (and the patterns for lib) only match files in the root of the lib-commonjs folder. This project has files that are in nested folders.

Copy link
Author

@osher osher Jun 5, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

gotcha! will fix

will also remove the .js.map per your comment below

...cound't get rush working for me though...

@iclanton
Copy link
Member

You also don't need to ship map files for ts.

.ts.map files are useful for mapping declaration issues back to the location in source, but we aren't embedding the source in those files, so shipping them is indeed not all that useful.

@osher osher requested a review from iclanton June 5, 2024 15:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@octogonz octogonz Awaiting requested review from octogonz octogonz is a code owner

@apostolisms apostolisms Awaiting requested review from apostolisms apostolisms is a code owner

@D4N14L D4N14L Awaiting requested review from D4N14L D4N14L is a code owner

@dmichon-msft dmichon-msft Awaiting requested review from dmichon-msft dmichon-msft is a code owner

@patmill patmill Awaiting requested review from patmill patmill is a code owner

@iclanton iclanton Awaiting requested review from iclanton iclanton is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@osher @iclanton