feat(ts-bindings): use upcoming stellar-sdk@12rc3 #1326
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
leighmcculloch
approved these changes
May 15, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
How come in everything that needs updating for 12rc3 there's no reference to the version at all? When the CLI generates the crate does it have a dependence on a specific, or specific and greater than version of the js-stellar-sdk? It probably should if it doesn't.
|
@leighmcculloch stellar-sdk@12rc3 hasn't been released yet. The package.json files in this repo will be updated to point at the official release once it's available. |
d5d4a59 to
e5cbfc1
Compare
|
New and removed dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎
🚮 Removed packages: npm/@stellar/stellar-sdk@11.3.0, npm/@types/node@20.11.26, npm/typescript@5.4.2 |
e5cbfc1 to
8504bc5
Compare
Uses the in-progress branch at stellar/js-stellar-sdk#962, which will be merged and released as 12rc3 soon. This PR can be updated to use the release at that point. Note that using the new `import { Client } from '@stellar/stellar-sdk/contract` entrypoint requires getting rid of the "build the TS Bindings for both Common JS and ES Modules" behavior we had before. I think this is fine. From [TypeScript's `moduleResolution` documentation](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/modules/theory.html#module-resolution-for-libraries): > When compiling a library, you don’t know where the output code will > run, but you’d like it to run in as many places as possible. Using > `"module": "nodenext"` (along with the implied `"moduleResolution": > "nodenext"`) is the best bet for maximizing the compatibility of the > output JavaScript’s module specifiers, since it will force you to comply > with Node.js’s stricter rules for import module resolution. We also don't really need these generated NPM modules to be more flexible than stellar-sdk itself, and it doesn't do the build-to-cjs-and-esm thing.
8504bc5 to
3e69106
Compare
Shaptic
approved these changes
May 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
Uses the in-progress branch at stellar/js-stellar-sdk#962, which will be merged and released as 12rc3 soon. This PR can be updated to use the release at that point.Uses the latest
stellar-sdk@12.0.0-rc.3Why
Fixes #1285
Known limitations
Note that using the new
import { Client } from '@stellar/stellar-sdk/ContractCliententrypoint requires getting rid of the "build the TS Bindings for both Common JS and ES Modules" behavior we had before. I think this is fine. From TypeScript'smoduleResolutiondocumentation:We also don't really need these generated NPM modules to be more flexible than stellar-sdk itself, and it doesn't do the build-to-cjs-and-esm thing.