Skip to content
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

Update deploy_chaincode.md package command docs #3191

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

curldapps2
Copy link

Define the default behavior of peer lifecycle chaincode package, which does not include node_modules in the resulting tar.gz package for chaincode. The existing step of npm install and quote "If the command is successful, the JavaScript packages will be installed inside a node_modules folder. Now that we that have our dependencies, we can create the chaincode package." would lead a reader to believe that node_modules are included when they are not.

Also added more detail about what chaincode services allow node_modules when packaged manually.

Type of change

  • Bug fix
  • New feature
  • Improvement (improvement to code, performance, etc)
  • Test update
  • Documentation update

Description

Additional details

Related issues

Define the default behavior of `peer lifecycle chaincode package`, which does *not* include node_modules in the resulting tar.gz package for chaincode. The existing step of `npm install` and quote "If the command is successful, the JavaScript packages will be installed inside a `node_modules` folder. Now that we that have our dependencies, we can create the chaincode package." would lead a reader to believe that `node_modules` are included when they are not. 

Also added more detail about what chaincode services allow `node_modules` when packaged manually.
@curldapps2 curldapps2 requested review from a team as code owners January 25, 2022 18:25
@denyeart
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you for the contribution! Please sign the commit using the instructions at https://github.com/hyperledger/fabric/pull/3191/checks?check_run_id=4941497881

@denyeart
Copy link
Contributor

@mbwhite Since we haven't received a signed commit yet, could you maybe move this one forward in a new PR? Take the inspiration from this PR and add any other clarifications that you think are needed...

@ale-linux
Copy link
Contributor

@curldapps2 thanks for your contribution, could you please take care of the DCO so that we can merge?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants