I am coming over to Go from Node.js and I am used to adding all my modules and then people just have to go npm install when cloning my package.
What is the equivalent of this with Go? I have a few imports and don't want people to have to manually install it if they use my package.
I also not sure if I create a simple Go application with just a package main if that allows people to just go get. I have really picked up on the Go way of repo sharing like Node.js
What is the equivalent of this with Go? I have a few imports and don't want people to have to manually install it if they use my package.
You don't have to do anything. People will not have to manually install the packages you import. When someone does
go get github.com/FrickeFresh/awesome
all of the dependencies you import in your awesome package will be downloaded automatically as needed.
Go get skips testing files by default, but a user can download those too by including -t:
go get -t github.com/FrickeFresh/awesome
But that's not something you need to worry about.
If you want to delve into vendoring specific versions of dependencies, there are a number of articles/tools available. The official tool is dep:
https://github.com/golang/dep
Basically you should take a look at vendoring. There exist tools that help you with versioning. Personally, I use vendetta which is just a little tool that "go gets" the referenced packages as git submodules into the vendor folder. So if anyone checks out my repo they simply do git submodule update --init --recursive. The package version can be specified as a git commit id in the respective submodule.
There also exist tools where you maintain the deps in a file, check out here.
Related
I want to try and make some changes to a package published in npm? (I've suggest some changes as an issue but I think they are simple enough for me to attempt them).
https://www.npmjs.com/package/bt-presence#contributing--modifying
The author supplies some information on how to modify the package, but not really enough for someone doing it for the first time.
Where should I clone the GitHub repo to? The folder where the package is installed? I tried it in my home folder and that would not build (unmodified).
The command npm run build - where is this run from? The root folder of the package where the package.json is?
Will I need to modify the package.json?
In general what is the best way to develop something like this for npm? I've worked on packages before but they were simply Javascript.
If you want to work on the bt-presence package in isolation, you can put the cloned repository anywhere. If you want to use your modified version of bt-presence in combination with an application, my recommended approach is to register bt-presence as a dependency in the application's package.json file with the version set to a relative path to your bt-presence repository; then running npm install in the application will make a symlink from node_modules/bt-presence in the application to your bt-presence repository.
npm run build should indeed be run from the root folder that contains the package.json of bt-presence.
If you just want to change the code of bt-presence, you won't need to modify its package.json. You would only modify the package.json if you need to change any of the settings in there, e.g, if you need to add additional dependencies to your version of bt-presence.
None of the above is really specific to TypeScript. (Some JavaScript packages have build processes too if they need to transform or package the JavaScript files in some way.)
I'm developing various Angular 2 projects and I want to share node_modules folder between multiple projects. I would like to create a structure like this:
MainFolder
- Project1
- Project2
- package.json
so I would have just 1 package.json for all the projects. My answer: is it possible to do this?
If possible, I have to lunch npm install with -g?
I can't understand how -g works.
Can someone give me instructions how to proceed?
Very thanks
I forgot to say that I build the projects with angular-cli.
The way I go around this for small/learning/test projects is with (I call it) "git projects". Basically I manage the various projects via git, and just "load" the project I want to work on. Of course this doesn't work if you want to have access to multiple projects at the same time.
I like to use a git client for this purpose because it's easier to visualize my existing "projects".
So my workflow is this...
Create my main/base folder. This will contain the git repo, the single node_modules folder, and whatever else that should be common to all projects.
I create the basic package.json file (using npm init). No description, no nothing, just the basic skeleton package.json file. (However, if you know you will use certain packages in ALL of your projects, you can npm install them first, so they will be added to package.json as your "base" modules.)
Now I check the bare package.json into the repo (and anything else that you may want to have in all of your projects, but usually it's just the package.json file). This will be the bare-bones starting branch for all projects.
Once this is checked in, I create a branch off of this in the git repo. This will be "Project 1" - or whatever you want to call it. Then build up your project however you want, installing modules, checking in changes, etc, etc.
When I want to start a new project, I simply check out the first bare-bones project (which is just the empty, or almost empty, package.json file) and do another branch off of it. This will be my 2nd project.
And so forth...
So the main thing is that every new "project" will be a new branch in the git repo, and to create a new project, just switch back to the original bare-bones one and do a new branch off of that.
Of course it is possible to create branches within a project, too. It's all about naming conventions. You could, for example, prefix a new project branch with "P_" or "PROJECT_", etc, so you can quickly tell in your git client which branches are projects. And of course use a different naming scheme if you just need a new branch within an existing project. That's basically how I go about it.
You may not like this workflow, but this way I don't need to install packages globally. When I do a backup, I can simply delete the single (possibly huge) node_modules folder. All project related modules can be reinstalled by simply checking out a branch for a particular project and run "npm install" on its package.json. Hope it makes sense.
Here is documentation on the various npm install arguments
In global mode (ie, with -g or --global appended to the command), it
installs the current package context (ie, the current working
directory) as a global package.
The -g install locations based on environment can be found here
One way you can achieve what you want is to have one solution for both projects and each project route uses it's own lazy loaded module.
Unless you have a specific business need to share resources, it's better to keep each project separate with it own resources and configuration.
-g Stands for global Installation, i.e. the packages you install will be available for all applications.
And why do you want to share node_modules and package.json file?
Keep them seperate for each seperate project. And if you need to share your project, you may share your package.json instead of sharing the node_modules folder.
Also to point out, if you manually install packages by listing their names, then you can use -g (global) flag, but if you do use only npm install then your packages won't be installed as global packages.
If it really is just for testing simple applications, could rename tha app folder in some way provide a solution. It assumes that all the dependencies are the same or at least a subset of the dependencies provided.
What would be the preferred way to handle internal modules within a node.js application?
I mean, currently we have a fairly big application and there are several dependencies, installed via npm. We have node_modules in .gitignore. Therefore it's not in the repository. We use npm shrinkwrap to freeze the modules versions, so, upon deployment, an npm install puts together eveything we need into node_modules.
The problem is, since out app is getting bigger, we want to split it to smaller modules. Now, if I create a foo module and put it in node_modues, I need to allow it in the repo, which does not seem so neat to have both ignored and checked out modules in node_modules.
We can not publish these on npm registry because they are not really "public".
Is there any obvious solution that I'm not aware of?
I agree with your aesthetic of not mixing 3rd-party non-repo stuff with your in-house revision-controlled contents.
The NODE_PATH search path variable can help you here, you can use a different directory with contents under revision control.
http://nodejs.org/api/modules.html
Depending on your appetite for flexibility vs complexity, you can consider a build step that actually copies your various node modules from wherever you keep them, into an output directory (probably "named node_modules" but not necessarily).
A common solution is to store the modules in a private Git repository somewhere, and then use a git:// URL as a dependency; npm knows how to clone repositories as dependencies.
Checking in node_module was the community standard but now we also have an option to use shrinkwrap. The latter makes more sense to me but there is always the chance that someone did "force publish" and introduced a bug. Are there any additional drawbacks?
My favorite post/philosophy on this subject goes all the way back (a long time in node.js land) to 2011:
https://web.archive.org/web/20150116024411/http://www.futurealoof.com/posts/nodemodules-in-git.html
To quote directly:
If you have an application, that you deploy, check in all your dependencies in to node_modules. If you use npm do deploy, only define bundleDependencies for those modules. If you have dependencies that need to be compiled you should still check in the code and just run $ npm rebuild on deploy.
Everyone I’ve told this too tells me I’m an idiot and then a few weeks later tells me I was right and checking node_modules in to git has been a blessing to deployment and development. It’s objectively better, but here are some of the questions/complaints I seem to get.
I think this is still the best advice.
The force-publish scenario is rare and npm shrinkwrap would probably work for most people. But if you're deploying to a production environment, nothing gives you the peace-of-mind like checking in the entire node_modules directory.
Alternately, if you really, really don't want to check in the node_modules directory but want a better guarantee there hasn't been a forced push, I'd follow the advice in npm help shrinkwrap:
If you want to avoid any risk that a byzantine author replaces a package you're using with code that breaks your application, you could modify the shrinkwrap file to use git URL references rather than version numbers so that npm always fetches all packages from git.
Of course, someone could run a weird git rebase or something and modify a git commit hash... but now we're just getting crazy.
npm FAQ directly answers this:
Check node_modules into git for things you deploy, such as websites
and apps.
Do not check node_modules into git for libraries and modules
intended to be reused.
Use npm to manage dependencies in your dev
environment, but not in your deployment scripts.
cited from npm FAQ
I'm using npm link as described here
http://npmjs.org/doc/link.html
Locally everything works perfectly. When I deploy to Heroku I get the error message
Error: Cannot find module '...'
How can I get this working with Heroku?
I wish there were an elegant solution to this (it would make my life a hell of a lot easier). Your custom package is symlinked into node_modules by npm link, but git doesn't follow symbolic links nowadays. So when you git push to Heroku, there's no way to make your custom packages go along for the ride.
Note, however, that from my experiments, Heroku will honor any node_modules you do push in, instead of trying to install them from the network. It just runs npm install --production, essentially. Perhaps a hard link directly to the development source of your package would do the trick, but I'm not sure whether Git would play nicely with that. Use at your own risk!
EDIT: If you want to know exactly what Heroku does, it's all open source.
The ideal situation would be to get the packages, if they're open source, onto NPM itself. Which is pretty painless and automatic.
If you are hosting your private module on GitHub (or BitBucket), you can add the git repo as a dependency in your package.json.
"dependencies": {
// ... all your deps
"my_private_module": "git+ssh://git#github.com:my-username/my-private-module.git"
}
You will, however, need to grant privileges to Heroku to read your repo (assuming it's private -- which is the crux of the issue). Check out this answer for a detailed set of instructions showing how to do so with Github. This might help for Bitbucket.
I've found that the build time increases when doing this. Worth it for my needs.