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

ts-proto needs to rev ts-proto-descriptors version so no protobufjs packages install #1101

Closed
jereklas opened this issue Sep 3, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #1102
Closed
Labels

Comments

@jereklas
Copy link

jereklas commented Sep 3, 2024

When protobufjs was replaced the ts-proto-descriptor package.json changed it's dependencies, but never published a new package. The ts-proto package also did not rev the ts-proto-descriptor dependency version (as there isn't one yet).

This results in a bunch of @protobufjs/* packages being installed by package managers (for type information) that shouldn't be installed at all (e.g. installing ts-proto@^2 will install ts-proto-descriptors@1.16.0 which installs protobufjs@7.2.5 -- which isn't correct based on the current set of files on the main branch)

@jereklas jereklas changed the title ts-proto needs to rev ts-proto-descriptors version so no @protobufjs packages install ts-proto needs to rev ts-proto-descriptors version so no protobufjs packages install Sep 3, 2024
@stephenh
Copy link
Owner

stephenh commented Sep 4, 2024

Ah yeah, great catch @jereklas -- thanks for filing the issue! I believe I've fixed this in the latest minor release; let us know if not.

stephenh pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 4, 2024
## [2.0.4](v2.0.3...v2.0.4) (2024-09-04)

### Bug Fixes

* Bump ts-proto-descriptors. ([#1102](#1102)) ([3d1cd61](3d1cd61)), closes [#1101](#1101)
@stephenh
Copy link
Owner

stephenh commented Sep 4, 2024

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 2.0.4 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

@jereklas
Copy link
Author

jereklas commented Sep 4, 2024

I installed 2.1.0, but the issue is fixed there so I'll assume it was also correct in 2.0.4. Thanks for the quick turn around on this!

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants