It might seem super opinionated, but it was @lambdalisue that suggested me to create this PR (at Deno Fest) :stuck_out_tongue: This migration has the following pros and cons, to my opinion:
Pros:
Commits are created for each updated dependency individually, which makes easier to find problems when tests fail.
We may even run tests for each commit in the workflow, using the --pre-commit option for molt update --commit.
Molt CLI is more interactive and (seems) faster than udd.
Cons:
We can't pin versions anymore. Dependencies are always updated to the latest version.
I'm planning to add pinning functionality to molt, but it won't be as convenient as version fragment of udd.
Molt might not be very stable yet.
Other changes to mention
I replaced PA token with action token, along with permission configuration. This should work and more secure I believe, but maybe I'm wrong.
I replaced create-pull-request action with gh command cause it is more fitted with molt's interface
It might seem super opinionated, but it was @lambdalisue that suggested me to create this PR (at Deno Fest) :stuck_out_tongue: This migration has the following pros and cons, to my opinion:
Pros:
--pre-commitoption formolt update --commit.Cons:
Other changes to mention
ghcommand cause it is more fitted with molt's interface