Conversation
Member
Author
|
Current dependencies on/for this PR: This comment was autogenerated by Freephite. |
ryantm
approved these changes
Dec 19, 2024
925109e to
c44da40
Compare
c44da40 to
de0f43c
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Why
Some packages appear to have their links represented as an array instead of a string. Let's support links in that format so upm search isn't broken.
What changed
packageLinkpackageLinksupports 3 formats:"<link>",{"url": "<link>"}, or["<link">]Test plan
upm search -l nodejs mkdirpworks again