chore: move common devDependencies to top-level package.json

[JKRhb]

Out of curiosity, I tried out if you can reduce redundancy in the package.json files by including shared devDependencies only in the top-level package.json file – and apparently, that works :)

This might require some double-checking but it could simplify updating shared devDependencies like TypeScript, eslint, and prettier in the future.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (bd247a0) 75.52% compared to head (3c88f71) 75.52%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1098   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   75.52%   75.52%           
=======================================
  Files          80       80           
  Lines       16167    16167           
  Branches     1517     1517           
=======================================
  Hits        12210    12210           
  Misses       3918     3918           
  Partials       39       39           

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

[egekorkan]

It looks ok for the mqtt package but in other ones I also see new packages introduced. Why is it the case?

[JKRhb]

It looks ok for the mqtt package but in other ones I also see new packages introduced. Why is it the case?

In cases where a devDependencies field continues to be present, some entries were only used by the package in question (the diff might be a bit misleading here). We could also move those to the top level, but I thought it might make more sense to keep such devDependencies limited to the package that actually uses them.

[JKRhb]

As some of the dependency versions got changed in the individual package.json files, I now reverted them back to the original versions to make it a bit clearer what has actually changed. A proper update should then be performed in a follow-up PR.

[relu91]

I'm wondering, don't we have a script dedicated to this kind of management of the dev deps? I talking about this, if it failed to check consistency what is there for?

[JKRhb]

I'm wondering, don't we have a script dedicated to this kind of management of the dev deps? I talking about this, if it failed to check consistency what is there for?

Oh, that is a very good point! In theory, the script should have indicated this kind of redundancy before. However, I think the actual check is currently disabled due to this line:

I will investigate and update the script if possible :)

[JKRhb]

The script should now be fixed by 0452ce8

[relu91]

Ok, thank you @JKRhb, my understanding is that in the future the script will pick up inconsistencies once again and if something is off the Github action will warn us. Is that correct?

[JKRhb]

Ok, thank you @JKRhb, my understanding is that in the future the script will pick up inconsistencies once again and if something is off the Github action will warn us. Is that correct?

Exactly :) If any devDependency could be moved to the top-level package.json, then the "Check version consistency of packages" workflow will fail.

[relu91]

Looks good to me!! we should document somewhere the stack that we are using for writing tests so that newcomers don't accidentally add new testing frameworks like jest.

[JKRhb]

Looks good to me!! we should document somewhere the stack that we are using for writing tests so that newcomers don't accidentally add new testing frameworks like jest.

Very good point! Should we open an issue for that?

[danielpeintner]

LGTM