[rush] Design note: Subspace configuration improvements about rushstack HOT 5 OPEN

I am excited to see this improvement! I would like to put some thoughts here:

1. Is there any pattern to share code in subspace pnpmfile.js across different subspaces? If so, is it point to the JS fashion require('relative_path/shared_pnpmfile.cjs')?

2. In the case where subspaces//pnpm-config.json is absent.

Is it say that the file-level absent? Or it means that property level absent in subspace's pnpm-config.json.

For example, useWorkspaces seems to be a monorepo-level configuration, and it cannot be set in subspace-level pnpm-config.json. Meanwhile, globalPnpmOverrides works great in subspace-level.

3. The ensureConsistentVersions setting should be moved from rush.json to common-versions.json

strongly agree!

4. rush version, rush install, etc always need to invoke rush check in a loop for every subspace (or else for a subset of subspaces affected by the operation).

If a certain subspace is ensureConsistentVersions disabled, it won't run rush check for this subpsace. Am I understanding it correctly?

from rushstack.

1. Is there any pattern to share code in subspace pnpmfile.js across different subspaces? If so, is it point to the JS fashion require('relative_path/shared_pnpmfile.cjs')?

@william2958 seemed to think this was not a useful feature, at least in TikTok's monorepo where there are hundreds of subspaces. Although you could technically share logic using require('../../common-stuff'), Rush/PNPM has no way to detect changes to files referenced in that way, which will break the rush install analysis. Also, long term, I think we want to strongly discourage usage of .pnpmfile.cjs (code) in favor of pnpm-config.json (data) as it is easier to validate and cache.

from rushstack.

Is it say that the file-level absent? Or it means that property level absent in subspace's pnpm-config.json.

"in the case where subspaces/<name>/pnpm-config.json is absent" means the entire file is absent. "all-or-nothing fallback" means all fields or no fields.

For example, useWorkspaces seems to be a monorepo-level configuration, and it cannot be set in subspace-level pnpm-config.json. Meanwhile, globalPnpmOverrides works great in subspace-level.

The useWorksapces and subspacesEnabled settings are expected to be removed in Rush 6 (always on). In the latest Rush, subspacesEnabled will produce an error if useWorkspaces=false for any subspace, so #4720 means that if you create a subspace-level pnpm-config.json then you must set useWorkspaces=true in that file also.

(BTW it would be technically possible to support useWorkspaces=false with subspaces, and even allow true/false for different subspaces, but we don't want to invest in that as our goal is to eliminate useWorkspaces=false.)

from rushstack.

4. rush version, rush install, etc always need to invoke rush check in a loop for every subspace (or else for a subset of subspaces affected by the operation).

If a certain subspace is ensureConsistentVersions disabled, it won't run rush check for this subpsace. Am I understanding it correctly?

Yes. I've clarified the wording.

from rushstack.

@william2958 Here's how the docs update will look to reflect these changes:

microsoft/rushstack-websites#235

from rushstack.