Skip to content

fix(deps): move @types/ramda to devDependencies - #76

Merged
frantuma merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
frantuma/types-ramda-dev-dependency
Oct 20, 2026
Merged

frantuma merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
frantuma/types-ramda-dev-dependency

Conversation

@frantuma

@frantuma frantuma commented Oct 16, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

This is part of the plan to clear the dependency policy findings on the published package. It is independent of the other steps, so it branches from main.

The dependency policy scan reports @types/ramda and types-ramda as a types package among the runtime dependencies, and recommends moving it to devDependencies unless the published .d.ts files reference Ramda types. They do not: after npm run build, nothing under types/ mentions ramda, types-ramda or ts-toolbelt. Consumers therefore never needed these packages, yet every install pulled in @types/ramda, types-ramda and ts-toolbelt. They now leave the production tree, and the package keeps @types/ramda only to type-check its own sources.

Since #80 merged first, a second commit adds all three to the deny-list of the package contract check, so they cannot come back into a consumer's install through any dependency. ts-toolbelt@9.6.0 is older than five years, and the plan expected it to leave the tree with this change.

Testing

Rebased onto main after #78 and #80. The only conflict was the devDependencies block, and npm install --package-lock-only leaves the resolved lockfile unchanged. npm run build, lint, type-check and npm test (570 tests) pass, as do the identifier check and the validator drift check. ./scripts/check-package-contract.sh passes; it installs the packed tarball into a scratch consumer, without @types/ramda, and type-checks every advertised subpath there. Its probe fails on a consumer of the tarball packed before this change, naming @types/ramda, types-ramda and ts-toolbelt with the paths that bring them in.

@mergewatch

mergewatch Bot commented Oct 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

mergewatch

1 file scanned · 4 lines reviewed · 6 specialized agents ran · dependency files detected

🟢 5/5 — Looks good to me
Reviewed the diff only — MergeWatch does not build, run tests, or read other checks.

Diagram — Move @types/ramda from dependencies to devDependencies

graph LR
    A["package.json<br/>dependencies"] -->|remove| B["@types/ramda ~0.32.0"]
    C["package.json<br/>devDependencies"] -->|add| B
Loading

Covers files changed in this PR — not the whole system.

This PR moves @types/ramda from runtime dependencies to devDependencies in the api-languageservice package, as the published `. d.

👍 Looks good to me! I didn’t find anything worth raising in this diff.

ℹ️ Review details — 11,628 tokens · ~$0.0369 · 5.9s
Model claude-sonnet-4.6
Review time 5.9s
Tokens 11,242 in · 386 out · 11,628 total
Est. cost ~$0.0369 (LLM only)

Was this review helpful? React with 👍 or 👎 on this comment.
View full details

mergewatch[bot]
mergewatch Bot previously approved these changes Oct 16, 2026
The published declaration files reference no Ramda types, so consumers
never needed @types/ramda, yet every install pulled it in with
types-ramda and ts-toolbelt. A dependency policy scan reports
@types/ramda and types-ramda as a types package among the runtime
dependencies. The package now only needs them to type-check its own
sources.
With `@types/ramda` a devDependency, a consumer of the packed package
installs neither it nor the `types-ramda` and `ts-toolbelt` it brought
in. The policy scan flagged the first two as a types package among the
runtime dependencies, and `ts-toolbelt@9.6.0` is older than five
years, so the deny-list of the package contract check now includes all
three.
@frantuma
frantuma force-pushed the frantuma/types-ramda-dev-dependency branch from 99f4b23 to 5b1d1b5 Compare October 20, 2026 10:53
@frantuma
frantuma merged commit 3158c53 into main Oct 20, 2026
10 of 11 checks passed
@frantuma
frantuma deleted the frantuma/types-ramda-dev-dependency branch October 20, 2026 11:16
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.

1 participant