Skip to content

refactor: use types consistently instead of typings #130

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 27, 2025
Merged

Conversation

agilgur5
Copy link
Owner

Summary

Rename typings fields and directories to types
Follow-up to #126

Details

  • since typings is now considered a legacy alias and can't be used inside of exports (as I discovered in fix(pkg): add types to package.json#exports #126 (comment)), update all references to consistently use types

    • package.json#typings -> types
    • typings folder -> types
  • for similar reasons, use consistent relative path ./ in package.json

    • so types matches exports.types, main matches exports.require, and module matches exports.import exactly

- since `typings` is now considered a legacy alias and can't be used inside of `exports`, update all references to consistently use `types`
  - `package.json#typings` -> `types`
  - `typings` folder -> `types`

- for similar reasons, use consistent relative path `./` in `package.json`
  - so `types` matches `exports.types`, `main` matches `exports.require`, and `module` matches `exports.import` _exactly_
@agilgur5 agilgur5 added the scope: types Related to type definitions label Mar 27, 2025

This comment was marked as resolved.

Copy link
Owner Author

@agilgur5 agilgur5 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

✅ LGTM, consistency is good, tests pass 👍

@agilgur5 agilgur5 merged commit 4410e49 into main Mar 27, 2025
4 of 14 checks passed
@agilgur5 agilgur5 deleted the typings-to-types branch March 27, 2025 20:06
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
scope: types Related to type definitions
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant