Conversation
|
@brad-decker Instructions on how to manage lavamoat policies and allow-scripts configuration are here: https://github.com/MetaMask/metamask-extension#changing-dependencies And yes, deleting the patch would be the correct approach. That reminds me - we don't document how to deal with patches yet 🤔 I should address that. |
a1de866 to
e6e437d
Compare
|
Erg... the policy file changes made me look at bundles https://bundlephobia.com/result?p=gulp-dart-sass@1.0.2 vs https://bundlephobia.com/result?p=gulp-sass@4.1.0 2.2mb minified vs 141kb minified... I'm thinking we just keep node-sass around for a while. edit: Well, it's mostly sass which we already include. shrug |
e6e437d to
41e4529
Compare
|
That is misleading because of node-sass, which downloads a binary as part of the install script I think? Thus hiding the true size. Plus the bulk of the size of the dart package is due to the sass package, which we already have in our dependency tree. I do think this would be a strict reduction in our dependencies. |
Builds ready [41e4529]
Page Load Metrics (591 ± 28 ms)
|
kumavis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looks good. huge yarn-lock reduction 👀 👍
41e4529 to
da4952d
Compare
|
I have just rebased this to fix the |
Builds ready [da4952d]
Page Load Metrics (642 ± 66 ms)
|
Back in #10208 I changed us over to using dart-sass instead of node-sass, but gulp-sass had a dependency on node-sass that still required it in our build. This change uses
gulp-dart-sassto remove that element.