How does this compare to `run: corepack enable`?
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TypeScript
- Stars
- 1.3k
- Forks
- 217
- Avg merge
- 8h 42m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Similar to #30 - I am wondering if there's an advantage to using this vs just running corepack enable, which as far as I understand, will instruct node itself to download and install pnpm, and will respect the packageManager field in package.json.
I'm doing this in my expect-type repo (permalink) and it seems to be working - is there a downside that you know of?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with .github/workflows/ci.yml at line 10 and the package.json packageManager field, then compare the workflow's setup with Node's Corepack enablement documentation. Done means documenting a clear advantage, limitation, or recommended choice.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- github-actions, node.js
- Domain
- ci-cd, tooling
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100