chore(deps): migrate globby to tinyglobby
#938
Conversation
| ); | ||
| return []; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| const globbed = await globby(glob, { | ||
| cwd, | ||
| expandDirectories: false, // TODO Temporary workaround for https://github.com/mrmlnc/fast-glob/issues/47 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The issue doesn't happen with tinyglobby, so we don't need to disable expanding directories.
lib/glob-assets.js
Outdated
| onlyFiles: false, | ||
| }) | ||
| ).map((result) => | ||
| result.endsWith("/") ? result.slice(0, -1) : result |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This stems from the way tinyglobby returns the results:
In case returning a trailing slash wouldn't break users, and you decide to go forward with this migration, I'm open to updating the tests instead!
|
@pralkarz it looks like this PR has a merge conflict |
pralkarz
force-pushed
the
globby-to-tinyglobby
branch
from
6772a44 to
b084e88
Compare
@benmccann Fixed! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hey @pralkarz,
I'm of the belief that globby is still very much supported in the hands of @sindresorhus, which gives the package a good level of integrity, and it serves it purpose very well without issues.
Is their a specific reason - apart from the package size - why you suggest we swap globby for tinyglobby?? 🤔
Hey @babblebey!
It's completely valid to want to stick with a battle-tested solution though! This PR is just a suggestion, up to you whether you want to go ahead with the migration or not. 😄 |
|
Very well then @pralkarz, thank you for the suggestion. I just wanted to understand whether there was a certain issue you experienced with globby hence the change with my question 😉 This being the case, I'm certain we would rather continue with globby considering our familiarity with it for now. |
This PR is a suggestion to replace
globbywithtinyglobby– a lighter alternative with less transitive dependencies.