feat: optionally use meta.getPackageJson for rootGeneratorName and ro… - #1834
Merged
Conversation
…otGeneratorVersion Resolve the root generator's package.json through the generator meta provided by the environment (`getPackageJson`, cached per package by the environment, or `packagePath`) instead of always looking it up from the resolved path. Fall back to `readPackageUpSync` for legacy environments and direct instantiation.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
…otGeneratorVersion
Resolve the root generator's package.json through the generator meta provided by the environment (
getPackageJson, cached per package by the environment, orpackagePath) instead of always looking it up from the resolved path. Fall back toreadPackageUpSyncfor legacy environments and direct instantiation.Purpose of this pull request?
What changes did you make?
Is there anything you'd like reviewers to focus on?