How to publish a library of Vue.js components? - javascript

I am working on a project containing a Vuex module and an abstract components that users can extend from.
I would love to publish this on NPM to clean up my codebase and pull this away from my project as a solid well tested module. I have specified the main file in package.json to load an index which imports everything I want to expose:
https://github.com/stephan-v/vue-search-filters/
The index contains this at the moment:
import AbstractFilter from './src/components/filters/abstract/AbstractFilter.vue';
import Search from './src/store/modules/search';
module.exports = {
AbstractFilter,
Search
};
For this to work I need to transpile this since a babel compiler normally won't transpile files imported from node_modules(Correct me if I am wrong here). Besides that I would probably be a good idea to do this so it can be used by different systems.
How do I transpile only the files that I need though with Webpack? Do I have to create a separate config for this?
What does a config like that look like? I know the vue-cli has a build command for one single file component but this is a bit different.
Any tips or suggestions on how to transpile something like this are welcome.
Edit
This seems like a good start as well:
https://github.com/Akryum/vue-share-components
The most import thing for Webpack users to notice is that you need to transpile your files in UMD which can be set by:
libraryTarget: 'umd'
This will make sure your are transpiling for Universal Module Definition, meaning your code will work in different environments like AMD,CommonJS, as a simple script tag, etc.
Besides that it is import to provide the externals property in webpack:
externals: {}
Here you can define which libraries your project users but should not be built into your dist file. For example you don't want the Vue library to be compiled / transpiled into the source of your NPM package.
I will research a bit more, so far the best options looks like to create a custom project myself If I want flexibility and unit testing.
Webpack docs
This is also a useful page which goes in depth about how to publish something with Webpack:
https://webpack.js.org/guides/author-libraries/#add-librarytarget

The best way probably will be to build the module and set main in your package.json to my_dist/my_index.js. Otherwise every project that will use your module will have to add it to include which is tedious.
You will also want your webpack build to follow UMD (Universal Module Definition). For that you must set libraryTarget to umd:
...
output: {
filename: 'index.js',
library:'my_lib_name',
libraryTarget: 'umd'
},
...
Also a good thing will be to add Vue to externals so that you didn't pack extra 200kb of vue library.
externals: {
vue: 'vue'
},
resolve: {
alias: {
'vue$': 'vue/dist/vue.esm.js'
}
}
And add it to peerDependencies in package.json:
...
"peerDependencies": {
"vue": "^2.0.0"
},
"devDependencies": {
"vue": "^2.0.0"
}
...
If you need an existing example of how to pack a vue.js component, you can take a look in one of the modules I maintain:
https://github.com/euvl/vue-js-popover
Particularly webpack.config.js and package.json will be interesting for you.

I was searching for a similar solution and found rollup https://github.com/thgh/rollup-plugin-vue2 (but was not able to make it work) and this component https://github.com/leftstick/vue-expand-ball where all the component code gets compiled to one reusable js-file.
I know that's not a proper solution but maybe it's sufficient for your needs.

Related

How to compile/build a TypeScript library that uses no NodeJS API/Module dependency to support browser

I wrote a few code that use plain browser Javascript APIs only and can be run well within browser HTML (served by IIS Server or Chrome Extensions). Now I want to contribute to the community by writing a library I have not seen on the market yet. However looking at current solutions, I am at loss at how a project is even built (WebPack/Browserify etc). A side note: I never actually work with NodeJS/NPM before.
For example I have this TypeScript project with the main file AwesomeClass.ts like this:
import { Helper1 } from "./Helper1.js";
import { Helper2 } from "./Helper2.js";
export class AwesomeClass {
doSomething() {
new Helper1().doSomething();
new Helper2().doSomething();
}
}
When built with tsc (I use VS Code as IDE), I can perfectly put this inside an Javascript module and browser can run it.
import { AwesomeClass } from "./AwesomeClass.js";
// Do something with AwesomeClass
So my question is, how do I build and distribute AwesomeClass? Maybe no NPM needed, but from a CDN? Ideally, I think somehow I should have the following output in a dist folder and developer can refer them either by hosting the files by themselves or use a CDN:
awesomeclass.js: For those who want to just use AwesomeClass without module feature (I think it's called UMD?). I.e. expose the AwesomeClass to global scope.
awesomeclass.es6.js: For those who want to use AwesomeClass by using import statement, like import { AwesomeClass } from "https://cdn.example.com/awesomeclass.es6.js";. I like this approach best and want to use this.
I should have something like awesomeclass.d.ts so those using TypeScript can use it. This one is especially tricky because so far I still don't understand how to make it work for 2nd scenario. TypeScript cannot get the type from an import statement from Javascript, and even ignoring that, I cannot get any typing for import statements.
In all cases, I would rather have only one js/ts file packed together if possible but not a deal breaker if I cannot (i.e. user will have to download Helper1.js and Helper2.js as well if I cannot).
Here's my current tsconfig.json:
{
"compileOnSave": true,
"compilerOptions": {
"noImplicitAny": true,
"target": "ES2020",
"module": "ES2020",
"declaration": true
},
"exclude": [
"node_modules"
]
}
There's quite a lot of things you're asking and each of them have several answers so I'll try to provide you with a bit of an overview of your options.
Compiling everything to a single file
One of the things you asked is how you can compile everything to a single file. You can do that in 2 different ways, either using webpack to bundle it for client or using typescript directly.
If you use typescript you have to set outFile to a specific file, in which case it will compile everything to that file, however you can only do that if your module is also set to amd or system, both of which are not ideal. While this works it's something I'd suggest you don't use.
Instead you should use webpack to bundle all your stuff with the output option, in which case webpack will use ts-loader to invoke typescript for you, compile your stuff and bundle it into a single file.
You should also note here that this is only applicable if you actually want to serve it through web and not if you're building a library. If you're building an npm package that you're planning on letting people install with something like npx packageName so that you can use it like import somePackage from some-package, then you should be compiling your stuff to a /lib directory into normal javascript and just let them import it as javascript. There's no reason for why you should provide them with the original typescript in that case.
How to build and distribute it
It really depends on what exactly you're building and how it'll be used, however overall you have 2 main options.
You can either host it somewhere on some server with a domain of your choice so that people can download it. Or you can put it anywhere like a normal git repo where people can download it. In this case you'll have to compile it with webpack yourself, upload it yourself and then just share the link with people i.e. https://example.com/downloads/awesome. Alternatively you can use webpack to render it server side and expose an API to people that they can call in order to get your code, then it will deliver the bundled javascript to them once they call the API i.e. https://api.example.com/awesome which will hit your API with a GET request, which will route to awesome and then you invoke webpack's compiler to bundle your code server side.
Your other option is to build your package like normal, compile it and then use the official npm registry to host your npm package. Using this option will allow people to npx package or npm i package on your code and also allow them to use it like import awesome from 'awesome'. If you go this route then using webpack isn't necessary, or it depends, because people using it will import it into their own project and build it into their own webpack setup and bundle if required. In this case all you have to do is compile your typescript to something like a /lib and allow them to install and import it.
From the things that you're asking/saying it seems to me that you're trying to create an npm package, for that all you need is to create the package, compile your typescript, set up an account on npm and push your package to their registry, from where you can let anyone install it. For this you also shouldn't care at all about compiling all your code to a single file because it doesn't matter, if they use import awesome from 'awesome' then that file can again import anything else inside your own package and they wouldn't know it. You can just tsc your code to an output directory and let them know which is the default export for that package.
If your code has to run in browser then I don't believe just using typescript will be enough, in that case you'll have to use webpack, you might also need babel if you need to support older browsers and polyfills, which is something you can add to webpack, then you'll use webpack to compile your bundle. Webpack will then invoke typescript, through ts-loader, which will compile and bundle your code for you ready for web. In this case you'll still need to push this code to the npm registry as a package so others can use it.
The choice between those options is entirely dependent on what it is and who's going to use it and how.
This should be the core requirements in the tscongfig.json file
{
"compilerOptions": {
"lib": ["es6", "es2020.promise", "dom", "es2020"],
"declaration": true,
"target": "es2020",
"module": "es2020"
}
}
While to pack everything in just one file, I think you have to use something like webpack; but I don't know enough this topic to help you on that, sorry.

How to split a library and its plugins among npm packages?

Im working on a JavaScript library and I want future users to be able to pick and choose the plugins they want to add to their project among with the main library. I'm having few issues with modules and webpack. I'm writing pseudo code to give an idea of how the code is organized.
My index.js for the main library looks like this:
import ClassA from "./classA";
import ClassB from "./classB";
export default class MyLib {
.....
}
export { ClassA, ClassB }
I can easily output the library with webpack:
output: {
path: ...
filename: 'mylib.min.js',
library: "MyLib",
libraryTarget: "umd"
}
To be able to choose which plugins to add, I'm creating different npm packages (one for each plugin), adding MyLib as an external dependency and then doing:
import {ClassA, ClassB} from "MyLib";
class PluginA extends ClassB {
constructor() {
this.test = new ClassA();
}
}
This works perfectly but, when "compiling" PluginA, webpack would include MyLib in the final js file for PluginA. If I want to include multiple plugins the code would end up with multiple copies of the main lib.
My final goal is to organize the code in such a way that can be easily installed with the following npm commands without having duplicated code everywhere:
npm install MyLib
npm install MyLib-PluginA
npm install MyLib-PluginB
Of course, one obvious solution would be to not use webpack for the plugins but I'd like to keep this option as the last resource in case nothing else works.
Thanks!
I wouldn't recommend using webpack to build your plugins/library. Rather, I'd let the consumer of the library decide on their own bundler. Your best step for the library should just be transpilation (if needed) of any intermediate code like babel-featured JS or TypeScript into something that can be safely require'd by node.
In addition, each plugin ought to have MyLib as a peerDependency instead of a regular dependency. That will make sure that MyLib doesn't get nested inside of the plugin's node_modules and will thus avoid duplicates being bundled. The plugins could in addition has MyLib as a devDependency for the sake of unit tests, but the important bit is that it's never a regular dependency.
Digging into webpack documentation, I've found a solution that uses webpack's externals.
From webpack documentation:
The externals configuration option provides a way of excluding dependencies from the output bundles.
I've just added the following lines to the webpack's configuration for the plugin:
module.exports = {
...,
externals: {
mylib: {
commonjs: 'MyLib',
commonjs2: 'MyLib',
amd: 'MyLib',
root: 'MyLib'
}
}
};
Webpack documentation: https://webpack.js.org/configuration/externals/
Hope this will help others.

How to avoid relative imports in modules intended to be bundled?

I'm developing a module that doesn't have a build that the user imports. Instead, he imports individual components and then bundles them along with his code. However, those components share utilities and I want to import them without going through relative path hell.
I know that's a pretty common question and I did some research. Suppose I have module/components/foo/bar/baz/index.js that wants to import module/utils/helper.js
Option 1
Just use relative paths and do:
import helper from '../../../../utils/helper'
Option 2
Use the module-alias package and have:
import helper from '#utils/helper'
This would work in Node.js because modules are resolved at runtime. However, let's say the module user has Webpack and imports the module:
import component from 'module/components/foo/bar/baz'
Webpack wouldn't be able to resolve #utils unless the user specifies that alias in his own Webpack configuration. That would be pretty annoying.
Option 3
Use Webpack aliases in webpack.config.js:
module.exports = {
resolve: {
alias: {
'#utils': path.join(__dirname, 'utils')
}
}
}
This would work fine if the module was pre-bundled. But as I've previously mentioned, I want the library to be usable with ES6 imports so that users can bundle only the parts they need.
Option 4
I could use the module name in the module's own source code:
import helper from 'module/utils/helper'
This appears to solve the problem, but I think it's a pretty bad solution. For development, you'd have to create a symlink node_modules/module -> module. I'm sure this hides many potential issues and collaborators would have to manually do it as well.
Is there a way to avoid relative paths while allowing the library to be used with ES6 imports?

javascript better import hook without navigating through relative folders

something which is bothering me when writing tests in my folder structure is the following thing:
//App
meteor/imports/api/tasks.js
//test
meteor/test/imports/api/tasks.test.js
So now when i import something from tasks.js i go like import { task } from '../../../imports/api/tasks.js' and my folder structure gets much bigger than this.
is there a better solution?
I was thinking of an import hook, maybe in the root tests directory, so i can import all the things from there, and when i am on the test, i can import from the import hook and don't have to do all the ../../../../ navigation.
If you are using babel, you can add babel-plugin-module-resolver to your babel configuration.
A Babel plugin to add a new resolver for your modules when compiling
your code using Babel. This plugin allows you to add new "root"
directories that contain your modules. It also allows you to setup a
custom alias for directories, specific files, or even other npm
modules.
The module resolver may collide with webpack2 module handling, so you'll want to limit it just to tests:
.babelrc example:
"env": {
"test": {
"plugins": [
["module-resolver", {
"root": ["./meteor/imports"]
}]
]
}
}
Use
/imports/api/tasks.js
instead of
../../../imports/api/tasks.js
The / to start with marks root.

Typescript Modules Into Single JS file?

Ok, I am complete lost with this. I have just started using Typescript with Grunt JS and need some help.
I have a working Grunt file thats runs my TS and then a uglify process for site ready files, here is the config:
ts: {
default: {
files: {
'/js/builds/main.js': ['/typescript/main/build.ts'],
'/js/builds/public.js': ['/typescript/public/build.ts']
}
},
options: {
target: 'ES5',
fast: 'never',
sourceMap: false,
allowJs: true,
declaration: false,
module: 'amd'
},
},
'uglify': {
options: {
preserveComments: 'some',
},
my_target: {
files: {
'src/js/main.js': ['/js/builds/main.js'],
'src/js/public.js': ['/js/builds/public.js']
}
}
},
watch: {
'JS': {
files: [
'/js/**/*.js',
'/typescript/**/*.ts',
'/typescript/**/**/*.ts'
],
tasks: ['ts', 'uglify'],
options: {
spawn: false,
},
}
}
So now I am working on my Typescript files, but I having a lot of issues, I want to use Typescript as a module system but to output into a single file, right now its set to AMD, which needs Require JS of which I dont know.
Right now I don't have the time to learn Typescript and Require JS. So where is what I have got right now,
test.js:
export class testMe {
constructor() { }
LogingData() {
console.log( 'Data being logged...' );
}
}
Then in my build ts file,
import {testMe} from "./clients/clients";
However this needs Require JS or module loading system in order to get it to run? I have tried using commonJs but it seems support for that was removed in Typescript 1.8 (I am using 2.0).
So how do I get my Grunt / Typescript into a single standard ES5 complied code, while using modules for Typescript?
Many thanks
UPDATE
This question & answer, Typescript compile to single file does not give an answer for how to setup grunt to use Typescript into a single file! Plus the answer states that Typescript 1.8+ will fix that issue - But the version I am using does not.
I am using Grunt to compile the TS code into one standard javascript file, without the use of System or Require JS. So I can use that within my HTML code.
The end goal would be to have two single files. To explain I have lots of single .ts files for two sections, one main and the other public - I have not work on the public section, just the main one, so all my tests I been on that section.
So to layout my file/folder path:
js/
builds/
main.js < targer end file
public.js <- target end file
typescript
main/
settings/
classA.ts
somethingelse.ts
othersection/
something.ts
buildMain.ts <- *1
*1 This file then takes all the ts files, via imports (not sure if thats the correct way) and then builds the complete standard single .js file.
I hope that explains my query in more detail.
Thanks
UPDATE 2:
I would just like to add that I am getting a single file, e.g. main.js but that is not a standard Javascript complied file. I don't want to use Require JS or any other external module loading system.
I want to use external .ts files has modules import them into a 'build' file and have that file compile down to a standard self contained javascript file without the need to include require js or anything else.
Hope that clears it up a little more..
Thanks.
I believe you can use --outfile to get everything into one file. The trick is to remove import and export statements and use /// <reference path="path/to/file.ts" /> on the first lines to declare the dependency / ordering relationships. Since it is the import/export statements that produce the calls to CommonJS or Require, omitting them prevents their generation.
Ref: https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/triple-slash-directives.html
For two output files, you'll probably need two tsconfig.json. (I might be incorrect here.)
If you don't bother with .d.ts files you can simply use just --module=commonjs(it is and will be supported) to compile each file into .js and then browserify to concat all modules together.
I'm using CLI scripts instead of grunt but it should be obvious what it does:
$ ./node_modules/.bin/tsc --module commonjs main.ts
$ ./node_modules/.bin/browserify main.js -o bundle.js
Then you can run it like any other JavaScript from browser or CLI using node.
There's also --outFile option for tsc but this is limited only to amd and systemjs modules so I think it's easier to stick to commonjs and browserify.
browserify is an amazing tool. You can generate UMD module with --standalone parameter that works also as global or exclude any external dependencies.
I highly recommend you to read the Official Handbook: https://github.com/substack/browserify-handbook

Categories