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
Yargs is no longer lighweight. #468
Comments
@osher I'm for this, I also think we should look at if we're checking in anything we can avoid -- we have quite a few dependencies so it does add up unfortunately. |
@bcoe It looks like the following dependencies could stand some cleanup:
|
This was referenced Apr 6, 2016
Closed
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
It started as lightweight, and was very cool (and still is).
But it's not lightweight.
Once installed, the size of a package including all its dependencies:
Yargs@4.4.0:
nomnom@1.8.1:
Commander@2.9.0:
ahm... :(
I was advocating for it, and was corrected by my listeners
It's not lightweight. It's ritch with features.
Since I don't think we should drop functionality, I suggest to correct the misleading description...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: