chore(NA): moving @kbn/config-schema to babel transpiler

[mistic]

One step forward on #69706

That PR moves the @kbn/config-schema from using tsc compiler to babel transpiler to produce the js outputs.

[elasticmachine]

Pinging @elastic/kibana-operations (Team:Operations)

[jbudz]

I didn't hit the build failure locally. I'll reset and see what happens.

[mistic]

@jbudz I've fixed those

[jbudz]

Were you able to hit the same error? I didn't have any luck after a reset. I'll take another look at my environment, want to make sure I'm actually testing things here.

[mistic]

Yeah I was able to reproduce it when running yarn kbn bootstrap with the commit hash 2122423

[mshustov]

Why and when we decided to use babel as the code transpiler for bazel builds? IIRC the original plan was to ditch babel in favor of tsc #77303 (comment)

[mistic]

@mshustov we had to change our initial plans due to performance reasons with the tsc compiler \cc @tylersmalley

[mistic]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[mshustov]

The build time performance, I guess? These packages aren't rebuilt often. On the whole, is this concern relevant for the Bazel architecture since we rebuilt modules only when they changed?

[mistic]

@mshustov the problem was the performance plus the fact we cant run the tsc in the transpile only mode. We want to decouple the type generation from the transpilation so we can avoid unnecessary cascading rebuilds when developing on packages. We are considering multiple options at the moment but we already agreed that for now we will use babel as a transpiler for packages

[mshustov]

that for now we will use babel as a transpiler for packages

Ok, let's document this decision in #77303

the problem was the performance

I believe you can improve performance by opting out of incremental builds for tsc. Yes, it's contr-intuitive, but incemental builds are slow for large modules, that problem seems to be solved in the last TS versions, but we are still lag behind.

[mistic]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[mistic]

@mshustov I will let @tylersmalley document our decisions into that issue

[mistic]

@elasticmachine merge upstream

[kibanamachine]

💚 Build Succeeded

• continuous-integration/kibana-ci/pull-request
• Commit: 70b5d2e
• Storybooks Preview

Metrics [docs]

✅ unchanged

History

• 💛 Build #141422 was flaky dc6f6e5
• 💚 Build #141281 succeeded 42f2069
• 💛 Build #141166 was flaky c25583b
• 💔 Build #141161 failed 60ee376
• 💔 Build #141153 failed 2122423

To update your PR or re-run it, just comment with:
@elasticmachine merge upstream

[kibanamachine]

💚 Backport successful

Status	Branch	Result
✅	7.14
✅	7.x

The backport PRs will be merged automatically after passing CI.