fix(xc-admin-frontend): remove use of nuqs#3497
Merged
Conversation
|
The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.
|
alexcambose
approved these changes
Feb 23, 2026
cprussin
commented
Feb 23, 2026
| }) | ||
|
|
||
| module.exports = { | ||
| export default { |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I noticed this was using cjs even though the package is esm and it was causing build log noise so I figured I'd fix it while I was here
9c892be to
8182179
Compare
8182179 to
59c1343
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Remove use of nuqs from the proposals app.
Rationale
Nuqs has been causing issues with this app and keeps causing the app to fail in production due to some issue with the way the package is getting bundled.
It's barely being used in the proposals app and it's not worth continuing to fight; instead I'll just replace it with a manual implementation.
How has this been tested?