Bump pdfjs-dist from 2.0.161 to 4.6.82#1098
Conversation
Bumps [pdfjs-dist](https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js) from 2.0.161 to 4.6.82. - [Release notes](https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/releases) - [Commits](https://github.com/mozilla/pdf.js/commits/v4.6.82) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: pdfjs-dist dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-major ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎
|
|
@Saira-A, I think it's potentially misleading to merge this PR -- I think we should probably make some further revisions on top of what was done here. When UV was converted to use WebPack, @edsilv was unable to get PDF.js to work in a WebPack build, and since that time, the PDF.js included via NPM has not been used. Instead, the library is loaded from a CDN through a hard-coded URL here: As you can see, that's currently using v3.11.174, which doesn't match either of the versions mentioned by this PR. I think there are a few things we could possibly do: 1.) Figure out a way to solve the Webpack problem, so UV actually uses the PDF.js version advertised in package.json. This would obviously be the ideal solution, but I don't have the expertise necessary to tackle it. My library doesn't even use PDF.js (we prefer PDFObject, because we've found PDF.js to be unstable for many of the PDFs in our collection), so I can't really justify investing time and effort into learning how to fix it. 2.) We could remove pdf.js from package.json entirely. This might be the most honest solution, but it also kind of masks that a potential problem exists. 3.) We could synchronize the versions between package.json and the hard-coded CDN URL so we're at least reporting the right version. My understanding is that the PDF.js integration is somewhat fragile, so I'm not sure whether upgrading from major version 3 to major version 4 will even work -- but it could be tried, and if it fails, we could roll back the number in package.json. What do you think? |
|
I agree that the first option sounds the best, but I don't know if were were using PDF.js either. I'll revert this back to how it was for now |
|
Thanks, @Saira-A. Does your collection include PDFs? If so, you are probably using PDF.js unless you have specifically switched it off through configuration. |
Bumps pdfjs-dist from 2.0.161 to 4.6.82.
Release notes
Sourced from pdfjs-dist's releases.
... (truncated)
Commits
Dependabot will resolve any conflicts with this PR as long as you don't alter it yourself. You can also trigger a rebase manually by commenting
@dependabot rebase.Dependabot commands and options
You can trigger Dependabot actions by commenting on this PR:
@dependabot rebasewill rebase this PR@dependabot recreatewill recreate this PR, overwriting any edits that have been made to it@dependabot mergewill merge this PR after your CI passes on it@dependabot squash and mergewill squash and merge this PR after your CI passes on it@dependabot cancel mergewill cancel a previously requested merge and block automerging@dependabot reopenwill reopen this PR if it is closed@dependabot closewill close this PR and stop Dependabot recreating it. You can achieve the same result by closing it manually@dependabot show <dependency name> ignore conditionswill show all of the ignore conditions of the specified dependency@dependabot ignore this major versionwill close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this major version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)@dependabot ignore this minor versionwill close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this minor version (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)@dependabot ignore this dependencywill close this PR and stop Dependabot creating any more for this dependency (unless you reopen the PR or upgrade to it yourself)