Closed jmartin-sul closed 3 years ago
turns out omitting version
doesn't generate complaints from npm i
, but using a version of a form other than NUMBER.NUMBER.NUMBER
for major/minor/patch, does generate warnings, see
@jermnelson would like to try automatically bumping the version using a github action, as is done in this example, but for now i'll try just omitting the version: https://github.com/cristianpb/muse/actions/runs/121509959/workflow (i've not set up a github action before, and i'm not the most facile with sed
, which that example uses, so i'm worried about that approach being a bit of a time sink for me personally)
see also https://github.com/LD4P/sinopia_indexing_pipeline/pull/269/files
unassigning myself from this, but leaving open in case @jermnelson wants to try the github actions approach.
deployed the sinopia apps to stage, and the supporting apps seem fine without a version in package.json (or at least sinopia_api does based on a quick smoke test where i searched in the editor and watched the network traffic)
Currently, the release checklist for the Sinopia applications specifies bumping the version in
package.json
(and then regeneratingpackage-lock.json
with the new version) forsinopia_editor
. It also instructs the person doing the release to tag new versions for all of the Sinopia codebases to be deployed (Sinopia Indexing Pipeline, Sinopia Exporter, and Sinopia API, in addition to the editor), as that's necessary to trigger creation of the Docker images for the latest code.However, the instructions don't specify a version bump in the
package.json
for the codebases other than the editor, and as such, the version specified inpackage.json
tends to lag the actual tagged/released/deployed version for those three apps, which is mildly confusing.We should amend the instructions to prevent this inconsistency.
Updating the version in
package.json
each time for all of the apps is a bit cumbersome (and Sinopia releases are already rather manual/cumbersome compared to the Rails apps that we justcap deploy
). Per @jcoyne, one idea would be to have a very non-specific version inpackage.json
, and have the release tags be more specific (e.g. version is1
inpackage.json
, version is1.0.3
for tag). That would prevent thepackage.json
version from disagreeing with the actual release tag, while also preventing the need to updatepackage.json
for each app for every deployment. IIRC, @jcoyne also pointed out thatversion
is required inpackage.json
, so we can't just omit the field.