You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Running into this with the ember-decorators library. Currently, the library is set up as a monorepo that consists of many addon packages, managed by lerna. This setup works well, but is very slow for testing. Even after consolidating all of the tests into the "main" ember-decorators package, it still takes twice as long as it would for a standard addon.
This is due to a double install occuring - first, lerna runs its install on every package via lerna bootstrap, and then links them up. Second, we run ember try:one in the main addon, which installs everything again.
I think ideally we would add a mode where you could only apply the diff to package.json in a given addon. Then, in our case, we would run the diff command first, then run lerna bootstrap, and have everything be installed and linked correctly in one go.
I'd be willing to open a PR for adding this if it seems like an acceptable feature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Running into this with the ember-decorators library. Currently, the library is set up as a monorepo that consists of many addon packages, managed by
lerna
. This setup works well, but is very slow for testing. Even after consolidating all of the tests into the "main"ember-decorators
package, it still takes twice as long as it would for a standard addon.This is due to a double install occuring - first,
lerna
runs its install on every package vialerna bootstrap
, and then links them up. Second, we runember try:one
in the main addon, which installs everything again.I think ideally we would add a mode where you could only apply the diff to
package.json
in a given addon. Then, in our case, we would run the diff command first, then runlerna bootstrap
, and have everything be installed and linked correctly in one go.I'd be willing to open a PR for adding this if it seems like an acceptable feature.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: