Conversation
This reverts babel#6029 due to issues in babel#6120. We need to first move `babel-loader` into the monorepo (and update its dependencies on `babel-core`). Afterwards, we can re-add `babel-standalone`.
|
@jridgewell, thanks for your PR! By analyzing the history of the files in this pull request, we identified @hzoo, @ChauTNguyen and @danez to be potential reviewers. |
|
Ahh, this is unfortunate :( Can we just comment out the build for now rather than completely deleting it? Just have it sit there until fixed. Would it be easy to move babel-loader into the monorepo? |
We could do it that way, but is there a reason? It should be as simple as
That'd be a question for @danez. |
Mainly thrash, and the fact that we want to move babili-standalone (now babel-minify-standalone) into the minify repo, and it'll reuse the shared Gulp tasks. We can put that on hold for now, but there's also some tooling that relies on the babel-standalone builds now (like the REPL previews) so if possible I'd rather roll forwards instead of back. Is the issue just that babel-loader's Babel reference is not lenient enough? If so, can I simply make my own fork of babel-loader to fix it? |
|
I have some ideas for potentially fixing this. If the issue is with the
wrong version of Babel-core being bundled, we can use a custom Webpack
resolver plugin that *always* prefers the monorepo version. I'll play with
some ideas today.
Sent from my phone.
…On Aug 18, 2017 9:31 PM, "Justin Ridgewell" ***@***.***> wrote:
Can we just comment out the build for now rather than completely deleting
it?
We could do it that way, but is there a reason? It should be as simple as git
revert #6135 to put this back in after we get babel-loader.
Would it be easy to move babel-loader into the monorepo?
That'd be a question for @danez <https://github.com/danez>.
—
You are receiving this because your review was requested.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#6135 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFnHYWysgP0G0p372sJ2zwZfWN8W1j0ks5sZmU7gaJpZM4O8OAT>
.
|
If you can get that to work, then perfect. |
|
Couldn't you simply set a
I'm not a big fan of monorepos for everything, but it would of course be possible. Tests are in jest and not mocha, but other than that should be doable. |
|
That sounds promising. I'll see if we can alias the Babel packages. I'm
still not 100% sure exactly what is broken so I'm going to try to replicate
the issue.
Sent from my phone.
…On Aug 19, 2017 2:25 PM, "Daniel Tschinder" ***@***.***> wrote:
Couldn't you simply set a resolve.alias in the webpack config to point to
the correct babel-core instance? https://webpack.js.org/
configuration/resolve/#resolve-alias
—
You are receiving this because your review was requested.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#6135 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAFnHWIKt2P7PUZwxaHsIjNpRps9CURfks5sZ1LQgaJpZM4O8OAT>
.
|
|
Hmm, this is super tricky. It's not actually a Webpack issue, it's a Node.js module resolution problem. Here's the stack trace I'm seeing:
I think you were on the right track in #6132, with some refinement. If we can install The other option is to override the Node.js module resolution algorithm (eg. by overriding I'll try the easiest approach first and see how I go. |
|
#6137 should fix this. Thank you so much for the initial investigation, @jridgewell! |
This reverts #6029 due to issues in #6120.
We need to first move
babel-loaderinto the monorepo (and update itsdependencies on
babel-core). Afterwards, we can re-addbabel-standalone.