It's a tough decision to make. At least from how I see it, we have corepack maintainers + some corepack users who want it bundled, and some Node.js maintainers + some corepack users who do not want it bundled. So you can't make a decision that makes everyone happy... - ThreadSky

joyeecheung.bsky.social • 64 days ago

It's a tough decision to make. At least from how I see it, we have corepack maintainers + some corepack users who want it bundled, and some Node.js maintainers + some corepack users who do not want it bundled. So you can't make a decision that makes everyone happy...

Comments

mael.dev•64 days ago

Still not sure which Corepack users you're talking about that works rejoice about this. It's fairly clear that the value of Corepack is that it's shipped with Node, otherwise as you say there are other options.

joyeecheung.bsky.social•64 days ago

I am talking about this https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/pull/1527#issuecomment-2687492577

Though I probably should also mention that TSC also includes corepack maintainers, or it includes people from all relavent perspectives AFAICT. In the end, the majority of TSC weighted the phasing out option over other options.

jakebailey.dev•64 days ago

Yeah, that's a main reason I used and recommended it, it was so easy

Otherwise, there are like 100 alternatives with varying implementations, feature sets, platform support, which I will fail to convince anyone to use since they're not built-in 🫠

(And the most workable necessarily can't be on npm)

joyeecheung.bsky.social•64 days ago

If I can make a wish to Santa, I would ask for a solution that does `foo install node@22+pnpm@21` (better yet, if the version specs are encoded into some local file), which supports all platforms, and have an open governance and get into the nodejs org, and I'll be very happy to use that.

baxuz.bsky.social•64 days ago

```
mise use node@lts pnpm@10
```

Now all we need is open governance

joyeecheung.bsky.social•64 days ago

Bonus point if it somehow supports something like `foo install node@26-pc+yarn@latest` (pc stands for pointer compression), that will be very nice

mael.dev•64 days ago

If 30% of Node.js users stated using Corepack in your surveys, EVEN THOUGH it's experimental, and EVEN THOUGH they need to explicitly enable it, and EVEN THOUGH it faced an impressive wave of FUD, it's probably that there's something that isn't achievable just by having a package on npm.

joyeecheung.bsky.social•64 days ago

I feel that it might warrant some kind of survey to actually know how quintessential it is to keep corepack bundled. If you ask me, now that the option that won is "phase out on v25", and the only reason that we are closing the vote was because v24 cut is near, it seems fine to do another survey.

joyeecheung.bsky.social•64 days ago

I don't speak for the TSC anyway, and I don't have vested interest in this (as a occasional corepack user at most I'll add npm install corepack to the workflow and that's fine). Though if someone wants to do an (over-due?) survey on how important bundling is they'll have my spiritual support.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply