Yarn vs NPM #138
silviogutierrez
announced in
RFC
Yarn vs NPM
#138
Replies: 2 comments 4 replies
-
I definitely recommend moving to npm. It's completely fine now. Last thing missing was reactivated/reactivated/processes.py Line 11 in eba2be2 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
4 replies
-
Resolved by #199 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
-
Projects created using Reactivated use Yarn Classic. When Yarn first came out, it was fast. dramatically faster than NPM. It also encouraged a lock file for deterministic builds. Finally, it had support for workspaces built-in. All while being fully compatible with the NPM ecosystem.
These days, NPM has caught up in speed. It also supports lockfiles and workspaces. More importantly, Yarn 2+ no longer aims to be a drop-in replacement for NPM.
The point of this RFC isn't to discuss the merit of Yarn 2+ features, but whether it makes sense to keep Yarn Classic as the package manager.
Pros
yarn run <command>
. You can just typeyarn <command>
.Cons
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions