-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.6k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
feat(create): better detection of package manager preference #6679
Conversation
✔️ [V2] 🔨 Explore the source changes: ba48fd6 🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/docusaurus-2/deploys/62164a7679dfda000a679be9 😎 Browse the preview: https://deploy-preview-6679--docusaurus-2.netlify.app |
⚡️ Lighthouse report for the changes in this PR:
Lighthouse ran on https://deploy-preview-6679--docusaurus-2.netlify.app/ |
Size Change: +478 B (0%) Total Size: 782 kB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
@@ -17,7 +22,6 @@ Use **[docusaurus.new](https://docusaurus.new)** to test Docusaurus immediately | |||
|
|||
- [Node.js](https://nodejs.org/en/download/) version >= 14 or above (which can be checked by running `node -v`). You can use [nvm](https://github.com/nvm-sh/nvm) for managing multiple Node versions on a single machine installed. | |||
- When installing Node.js, you are recommended to check all checkboxes related to dependencies. | |||
- [Yarn](https://yarnpkg.com/en/) version >= 1.5 (which can be checked by running `yarn --version`). Yarn is a performant package manager for JavaScript and replaces the `npm` client. It is not strictly necessary but highly encouraged. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure about this. In my experience, using NPM has not been totally harmless. For example, #6073 is exactly caused by NPM doing something fishy. It's better if we can recommend good practices.
website/docs/installation.md
Outdated
|
||
```bash | ||
# Modern way available since npm v6+ | ||
npm init docusaurus website classic |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
See #5797. Generally I don't think that's a problem because the user can use the interactive prompting to provide options anyways, but it's better if we can be always safe.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not a fan of documenting multiple versions across our doc, or cluttering it with too many tabs and options.
"npx" is the only one that works well across node/npm versions without added complexity
Wouldn't it be odd if we use npx in some places and npm init in other places?
See for example TS: https://docusaurus.io/docs/typescript-support#initialization
npx create-docusaurus@latest my-website classic --typescript
This is hard to convert to npm init in a way that works for both npm6/7
Let's not change something that works. Most users are happy with npx and nobody complained with this doc for a while.
This is confusing that we say "npx" is outdated and we use it in many places
Power users that know their package managers can still decide themselves to use npm init
or yarn create
and I'm ok to force a specific package manager in this case
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I just liked describing the possible options for initializing a new project, as was done in the CRA docs. Perhaps not all users know about yarn create
, even if they use yarn. Alright, I'll delete it, but what about the paragraph with the yarn requirement, it doesn't need to be reverted?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also believe some more exhaustive documentation is necessary in at least one place. The typescript support documentation is only meant to be a brief example that works, but we can't be like "be exhaustive everywhere or be exhaustive nowhere".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what about adding tabs in a details/summary component?
I just really want to avoid cluttering the doc with info that most users don't need to see.
Usually it's a one-shot to generate the project, it's not that important to document deeply everything and is actually harmful. Frontend devs know how to delete a lockfile and generate it again with another package manager. Non-dev users will just have npm and don't care about alternatives.
Something worth mentioning:
- CRA users are usually devs
- Docusaurus has a lot of non-dev users that don't even know what npm is anyway
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
what about adding tabs in a details/summary component?
Oh, that's a good idea, added to the very end of the section.
Docusaurus has a lot of non-dev users that don't even know what npm is anyway
Well I would not say so, in fact Docusaurus is also very much used by [open-source] developers.
Frontend devs know how to delete a lockfile and generate it again with another package manager
Yes, but a developer needs to do one unnecessary action then, it is not very user-friendly in general.
website/docs/installation.md
Outdated
# Modern way available since npm v6+ | ||
npm init docusaurus website classic | ||
|
||
# Outdated way available since npm v5.2+ | ||
npx create-docusaurus@latest website classic |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
npx
is the only command commonly known to execute a package script from the NPM registry which doesn't permanently install it locally, so in #5797 npm init
/yarn create
was replaced with this. It was not meant to mean "npm", although we do know that npm provides this command. In Yarn berry there's yarn dlx
, but it's not that popular.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Choosing a default package manager is not an easy thing to do... We choose to default to Yarn whenever possible because we just feel that Yarn is objectively a better package manager than NPM, and it's also used by ourselves, which means the chances that package managers freaking out will be the lowest for Yarn (for example, it's the most lenient towards unmet peer dependencies).
npm init
and yarn create
are certainly indicative enough of package manager preferences, but npx
was only written there because npm init
doesn't work in all cases. We meant to make it a replacement for both npm init
and yarn create
. In this case, I don't want to default to NPM.
The thing I like about this PR is being able to use PNPM as default, as mentioned in #6631. Maybe we should also recursively look up the directories and try to find a lockfile? Does that make sense in all cases?
return ( | ||
SupportedPackageManagers.find((packageManager) => | ||
process.env.npm_config_user_agent?.startsWith(packageManager), | ||
) || 'npm' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
At least, I don't want to use NPM as fallback but rather use the heuristic we had before. For example, I do have create-docusaurus
installed globally, and if I run create-docusaurus
without a package manager, it defaults to NPM with no way for me to select Yarn.
I think we can have three layers of heuristics:
- Detect lockfiles. For example, the existence of a
pnpm-lock.yaml
orpackage-lock.json
in a parent/grandparent folder is indicative enough that we are installing in an existing project. - If this is a standalone project, use the
npm_config_user_agent
except when the command is initiated bynpx
. - If the user is executing a global
create-docusaurus
, or if the command is usingnpx
, we look foryarnpkg
in the PATH.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree that lock files do need to be considered, but I'm still not sure about using yarn as the default option. If Docusaurus should play equally well with any popular package manager, then using npm as default seems like the most reasonable or predictable as default option. This is well illustrated by the CRA, on whose behavior Docusaurus is based right now. However, since latest major release of CRA, they started to use yarn if end user initialized the new project via it, in all other cases npm is used (including npx). That's why I suppose we also need to adjust the current process of initializing in similar way -- it's more reasonable and expectable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh, I wasn't following the latest CRA, but interesting to know that they default to NPM now... In that case, I think maybe we should also add an optional --pkg-manager
option and replace --use-npm
with that, otherwise the user can only halt the installation and manually install again in case the pkg manager detection is not good? I'm trying to push back on NPM because I do have some personal opinions about it😅
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
An option like the --pkg-manager
might be a good idea, but in my opinion it would require more effort to implement, so within this PR I would only improve "detection mechanism" for package manager. --use-npm
is more like a temporary workaround that may no longer be needed after this PR.
I do have some personal opinions about it
Haha, I understand it, I have sort of a similar feeling, but we need to consider the interests of users first.
const packageManagerFromLockFile = packageManagers.find((packageManager) => | ||
fs.existsSync( | ||
path.resolve(process.cwd(), SupportedPackageManagers[packageManager]), | ||
), | ||
); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we look up a few folders? In case the user is creating the website at packages/website
and the lock file is at the monorepo's root.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is assumed that the starter command will be running from the root of project in any case. So I didn't want to complicate the process with this at the moment.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure. create-docusaurus
is not very well-documented now, there are some interesting features that few users know. I'll probably improve that later
What I understand is that, if I have npm + yarn installed, running this command will always use npm now right?
Personally, I don't really like it that much. If I installed yarn, it's usually because I like it better than npm. It's not like I have the possibility to install only yarn and not npm: it's either just npm, or both. And we have a I'm ok to use the current package manager in case of |
Well, Alexey complained😆 (Although I'm not sure as of why) And yes, I agree here that "It's not like I have the possibility to install only yarn and not npm: it's either just npm, or both." That was essentially my stance. |
npx is a tool introduced by npm. So it seems quite logical that by initializing a new project via npx, the dependencies will be installed via npm. The fact that React-based tools like Create React App, Create Next app, Create Remix work this same/equal way should demonstrate us that this is better behavior, adopted in the community, in comparison with using yarn by default in npx context. |
To keep docs as clean as possible, it's best to place new information only on the Installation page. |
Can we also investigate #5182 and see if it's relevant today? Maybe also making |
According to the docs https://pnpm.io/pnpx-cli, this command is deprecated, although currently it can be used to initialize a new project via running |
Okay, looks like |
Even using pnpx, npm_user_agent env var will be defined as |
async function getPackageManager( | ||
forceUseNpm?: boolean, | ||
): Promise<SupportedPackageManager> { | ||
if (forceUseNpm) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Add a TODO comment about allowing a package manager option to replace the --use-npm
option?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
👍
Motivation
Currently
create-docusaurus
is counterintuitive and quite opinionated. Suppose if I run thenpx create-docusaurus@latest my-website classic
command, then install the dependencies for the new project is done viayarn
instead ofnpm
(as I probably expect since I used npx/npm, not yarn).I guess we need to stop forcing the initializing of the new project only via
yarn
. Although, previously I had added the ability to initialize a project vianpm
(eg,npx create-docusaurus@latest my-website classic --use-npm
), but I did this for my own purposes, to make it easier to test new releases for my self.However, looking at other projects like Create React App or Vite, I now understand that the used package manager should be taken into account when initializing the new project. If I use npm/npx -- the deps for the new project must be installed via npm, if I use the
yarn create ...
command -- the deps must be installed viayarn
, etc.So I also added support for pnpm as a pretty good alternative to npm/yarn.
Have you read the Contributing Guidelines on pull requests?
Yes
Test Plan
Locally testing or canary should work.
Related PRs