Skip to content

Conversation

G-Rath
Copy link
Contributor

@G-Rath G-Rath commented Jul 20, 2024

This PR contains a:

  • bugfix
  • new feature
  • code refactor
  • test update
  • typo fix
  • metadata update

Motivation / Use-Case

The Sass team considers sass-embedded to be stable and production-ready, so by preferring it over sass developers can use optionalDependencies to take advantage of the more performant variant whenever possible without having to explicitly determine that for themselves.

Resolves #1180
Resolves #1210

Breaking Changes

My understanding is that sass-embedded is a drop-in replacement, meaning this should not be a breaking change, though would appreciate input from @nex3 to confirm this is true enough to make this technically-not-breaking

@G-Rath G-Rath force-pushed the prefer-sass-embedded branch 2 times, most recently from 58b967c to 1ddc100 Compare July 21, 2024 18:26
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 21, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 40.00000% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 94.17%. Comparing base (31789cc) to head (78e1d9d).
Report is 12 commits behind head on master.

Files Patch % Lines
src/utils.js 40.00% 3 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1211      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   94.44%   94.17%   -0.27%     
==========================================
  Files           3        3              
  Lines         360      412      +52     
  Branches      132      155      +23     
==========================================
+ Hits          340      388      +48     
- Misses         18       22       +4     
  Partials        2        2              

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@G-Rath
Copy link
Contributor Author

G-Rath commented Jul 21, 2024

The uncovered lines are not new, and don't seem to be easily covered as jest makes it a lot of work to mock require.resolve

Copy link
Member

@evenstensberg evenstensberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This looks good.

Copy link
Member

@alexander-akait alexander-akait left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, we can't merge it right now, because it is a breaking change, I want t have a little bit more time to test sass-embedded in the wild, but I am fine with such changes

@alexander-akait
Copy link
Member

Oh, looks like we need to do it due #1210, thank you

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Heads up: the Sass legacy JS API will start emitting warnings soon Make it easier to prefer sass-embedded over sass
3 participants