Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.3 #124

renovate · 2024-05-07T08:05:07+01:00

renovate commented

2024-05-07 08:05:07 +01:00

This PR contains the following updates:

Package	Type	Update	Change
esbuild	dependencies	minor	`0.20.2` -> `0.21.3`

Release Notes

evanw/esbuild (esbuild)

`v0.21.3`

Compare Source

Implement the decorator metadata proposal (#3760)

This release implements the decorator metadata proposal, which is a sub-proposal of the decorators proposal. Microsoft shipped the decorators proposal in TypeScript 5.0 and the decorator metadata proposal in TypeScript 5.2, so it's important that esbuild also supports both of these features. Here's a quick example:
```
// Shim the "Symbol.metadata" symbol
Symbol.metadata ??= Symbol('Symbol.metadata')

const track = (_, context) => {
  (context.metadata.names ||= []).push(context.name)
}

class Foo {
  @&#8203;track foo = 1
  @&#8203;track bar = 2
}

// Prints ["foo", "bar"]
console.log(Foo[Symbol.metadata].names)
```
⚠️ WARNING ⚠️

This proposal has been marked as "stage 3" which means "recommended for implementation". However, it's still a work in progress and isn't a part of JavaScript yet, so keep in mind that any code that uses JavaScript decorator metadata may need to be updated as the feature continues to evolve. If/when that happens, I will update esbuild's implementation to match the specification. I will not be supporting old versions of the specification.
Fix bundled decorators in derived classes (#3768)

In certain cases, bundling code that uses decorators in a derived class with a class body that references its own class name could previously generate code that crashes at run-time due to an incorrect variable name. This problem has been fixed. Here is an example of code that was compiled incorrectly before this fix:
```
class Foo extends Object {
  @&#8203;(x => x) foo() {
    return Foo
  }
}
console.log(new Foo().foo())
```
Fix tsconfig.json files inside symlinked directories (#3767)

This release fixes an issue with a scenario involving a tsconfig.json file that extends another file from within a symlinked directory that uses the paths feature. In that case, the implicit baseURL value should be based on the real path (i.e. after expanding all symbolic links) instead of the original path. This was already done for other files that esbuild resolves but was not yet done for tsconfig.json because it's special-cased (the regular path resolver can't be used because the information inside tsconfig.json is involved in path resolution). Note that this fix no longer applies if the --preserve-symlinks setting is enabled.

`v0.21.2`

Compare Source

Correct this in field and accessor decorators (#3761)

This release changes the value of this in initializers for class field and accessor decorators from the module-level this value to the appropriate this value for the decorated element (either the class or the instance). It was previously incorrect due to lack of test coverage. Here's an example of a decorator that doesn't work without this change:
```
const dec = () => function() { this.bar = true }
class Foo { @&#8203;dec static foo }
console.log(Foo.bar) // Should be "true"
```
Allow es2023 as a target environment (#3762)

TypeScript recently added es2023 as a compilation target, so esbuild now supports this too. There is no difference between a target of es2022 and es2023 as far as esbuild is concerned since the 2023 edition of JavaScript doesn't introduce any new syntax features.

`v0.21.1`

Compare Source

Fix a regression with --keep-names (#3756)

The previous release introduced a regression with the --keep-names setting and object literals with get/set accessor methods, in which case the generated code contained syntax errors. This release fixes the regression:
```
// Original code
x = { get y() {} }

// Output from version 0.21.0 (with --keep-names)
x = { get y: /* @&#8203;__PURE__ */ __name(function() {
}, "y") };

// Output from this version (with --keep-names)
x = { get y() {
} };
```

`v0.21.0`

Compare Source

This release doesn't contain any deliberately-breaking changes. However, it contains a very complex new feature and while all of esbuild's tests pass, I would not be surprised if an important edge case turns out to be broken. So I'm releasing this as a breaking change release to avoid causing any trouble. As usual, make sure to test your code when you upgrade.

Implement the JavaScript decorators proposal (#104)

With this release, esbuild now contains an implementation of the upcoming JavaScript decorators proposal. This is the same feature that shipped in TypeScript 5.0 and has been highly-requested on esbuild's issue tracker. You can read more about them in that blog post and in this other (now slightly outdated) extensive blog post here: https://2ality.com/2022/10/javascript-decorators.html. Here's a quick example:
```
const log = (fn, context) => function() {
  console.log(`before ${context.name}`)
  const it = fn.apply(this, arguments)
  console.log(`after ${context.name}`)
  return it
}

class Foo {
  @&#8203;log static foo() {
    console.log('in foo')
  }
}

// Logs "before foo", "in foo", "after foo"
Foo.foo()
```
Note that this feature is different than the existing "TypeScript experimental decorators" feature that esbuild already implements. It uses similar syntax but behaves very differently, and the two are not compatible (although it's sometimes possible to write decorators that work with both). TypeScript experimental decorators will still be supported by esbuild going forward as they have been around for a long time, are very widely used, and let you do certain things that are not possible with JavaScript decorators (such as decorating function parameters). By default esbuild will parse and transform JavaScript decorators, but you can tell esbuild to parse and transform TypeScript experimental decorators instead by setting "experimentalDecorators": true in your tsconfig.json file.

Probably at least half of the work for this feature went into creating a test suite that exercises many of the proposal's edge cases: https://github.com/evanw/decorator-tests. It has given me a reasonable level of confidence that esbuild's initial implementation is acceptable. However, I don't have access to a significant sample of real code that uses JavaScript decorators. If you're currently using JavaScript decorators in a real code base, please try out esbuild's implementation and let me know if anything seems off.

⚠️ WARNING ⚠️

This proposal has been in the works for a very long time (work began around 10 years ago in 2014) and it is finally getting close to becoming part of the JavaScript language. However, it's still a work in progress and isn't a part of JavaScript yet, so keep in mind that any code that uses JavaScript decorators may need to be updated as the feature continues to evolve. The decorators proposal is pretty close to its final form but it can and likely will undergo some small behavioral adjustments before it ends up becoming a part of the standard. If/when that happens, I will update esbuild's implementation to match the specification. I will not be supporting old versions of the specification.

Optimize the generated code for private methods

Previously when lowering private methods for old browsers, esbuild would generate one WeakSet for each private method. This mirrors similar logic for generating one WeakSet for each private field. Using a separate WeakMap for private fields is necessary as their assignment can be observable:

let it
class Bar {
  constructor() {
    it = this
  }
}
class Foo extends Bar {
  #x = 1
  #y = null.foo
  static check() {
    console.log(#x in it, #y in it)
  }
}
try { new Foo } catch {}
Foo.check()

This prints true false because this partially-initialized instance has #x but not #y. In other words, it's not true that all class instances will always have all of their private fields. However, the assignment of private methods to a class instance is not observable. In other words, it's true that all class instances will always have all of their private methods. This means esbuild can lower private methods into code where all methods share a single WeakSet, which is smaller, faster, and uses less memory. Other JavaScript processing tools such as the TypeScript compiler already make this optimization. Here's what this change looks like:

// Original code
class Foo {
  #x() { return this.#x() }
  #y() { return this.#y() }
  #z() { return this.#z() }
}

// Old output (--supported:class-private-method=false)
var _x, x_fn, _y, y_fn, _z, z_fn;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __privateAdd(this, _x);
    __privateAdd(this, _y);
    __privateAdd(this, _z);
  }
}
_x = new WeakSet();
x_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _x, x_fn).call(this);
};
_y = new WeakSet();
y_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _y, y_fn).call(this);
};
_z = new WeakSet();
z_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _z, z_fn).call(this);
};

// New output (--supported:class-private-method=false)
var _Foo_instances, x_fn, y_fn, z_fn;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __privateAdd(this, _Foo_instances);
  }
}
_Foo_instances = new WeakSet();
x_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, x_fn).call(this);
};
y_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, y_fn).call(this);
};
z_fn = function() {
  return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, z_fn).call(this);
};

Fix an obscure bug with lowering class members with computed property keys

When class members that use newer syntax features are transformed for older target environments, they sometimes need to be relocated. However, care must be taken to not reorder any side effects caused by computed property keys. For example, the following code must evaluate a() then b() then c():
```
class Foo {
  [a()]() {}
  [b()];
  static { c() }
}
```
Previously esbuild did this by shifting the computed property key forward to the next spot in the evaluation order. Classes evaluate all computed keys first and then all static class elements, so if the last computed key needs to be shifted, esbuild previously inserted a static block at start of the class body, ensuring it came before all other static class elements:
```
var _a;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  static {
    _a = b();
  }
  [a()]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}
```
However, this could cause esbuild to accidentally generate a syntax error if the computed property key contains code that isn't allowed in a static block, such as an await expression. With this release, esbuild fixes this problem by shifting the computed property key backward to the previous spot in the evaluation order instead, which may push it into the extends clause or even before the class itself:
```
// Original code
class Foo {
  [a()]() {}
  [await b()];
  static { c() }
}

// Old output (with --supported:class-field=false)
var _a;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  static {
    _a = await b();
  }
  [a()]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}

// New output (with --supported:class-field=false)
var _a, _b;
class Foo {
  constructor() {
    __publicField(this, _a);
  }
  [(_b = a(), _a = await b(), _b)]() {
  }
  static {
    c();
  }
}
```
Fix some --keep-names edge cases

The NamedEvaluation syntax-directed operation in the JavaScript specification gives certain anonymous expressions a name property depending on where they are in the syntax tree. For example, the following initializers convey a name value:
```
var foo = function() {}
var bar = class {}
console.log(foo.name, bar.name)
```
When you enable esbuild's --keep-names setting, esbuild generates additional code to represent this NamedEvaluation operation so that the value of the name property persists even when the identifiers are renamed (e.g. due to minification).

However, I recently learned that esbuild's implementation of NamedEvaluation is missing a few cases. Specifically esbuild was missing property definitions, class initializers, logical-assignment operators. These cases should now all be handled:
```
var obj = { foo: function() {} }
class Foo0 { foo = function() {} }
class Foo1 { static foo = function() {} }
class Foo2 { accessor foo = function() {} }
class Foo3 { static accessor foo = function() {} }
foo ||= function() {}
foo &&= function() {}
foo ??= function() {}
```

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

♻ Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.

If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR has been generated by Renovate Bot.

This PR contains the following updates: | Package | Type | Update | Change | |---|---|---|---| | [esbuild](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild) | dependencies | minor | [`0.20.2` -> `0.21.3`](https://renovatebot.com/diffs/npm/esbuild/0.20.2/0.21.3) | --- ### Release Notes <details> <summary>evanw/esbuild (esbuild)</summary> ### [`v0.21.3`](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/blob/HEAD/CHANGELOG.md#0213) [Compare Source](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/compare/v0.21.2...v0.21.3) - Implement the decorator metadata proposal ([#3760](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3760)) This release implements the [decorator metadata proposal](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-decorator-metadata), which is a sub-proposal of the [decorators proposal](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-decorators). Microsoft shipped the decorators proposal in [TypeScript 5.0](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-5-0/#decorators) and the decorator metadata proposal in [TypeScript 5.2](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-5-2/#decorator-metadata), so it's important that esbuild also supports both of these features. Here's a quick example: ```js // Shim the "Symbol.metadata" symbol Symbol.metadata ??= Symbol('Symbol.metadata') const track = (_, context) => { (context.metadata.names ||= []).push(context.name) } class Foo { @track foo = 1 @track bar = 2 } // Prints ["foo", "bar"] console.log(Foo[Symbol.metadata].names) ``` **⚠️ WARNING ⚠️** This proposal has been marked as "stage 3" which means "recommended for implementation". However, it's still a work in progress and isn't a part of JavaScript yet, so keep in mind that any code that uses JavaScript decorator metadata may need to be updated as the feature continues to evolve. If/when that happens, I will update esbuild's implementation to match the specification. I will not be supporting old versions of the specification. - Fix bundled decorators in derived classes ([#3768](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3768)) In certain cases, bundling code that uses decorators in a derived class with a class body that references its own class name could previously generate code that crashes at run-time due to an incorrect variable name. This problem has been fixed. Here is an example of code that was compiled incorrectly before this fix: ```js class Foo extends Object { @(x => x) foo() { return Foo } } console.log(new Foo().foo()) ``` - Fix `tsconfig.json` files inside symlinked directories ([#3767](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3767)) This release fixes an issue with a scenario involving a `tsconfig.json` file that `extends` another file from within a symlinked directory that uses the `paths` feature. In that case, the implicit `baseURL` value should be based on the real path (i.e. after expanding all symbolic links) instead of the original path. This was already done for other files that esbuild resolves but was not yet done for `tsconfig.json` because it's special-cased (the regular path resolver can't be used because the information inside `tsconfig.json` is involved in path resolution). Note that this fix no longer applies if the `--preserve-symlinks` setting is enabled. ### [`v0.21.2`](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/blob/HEAD/CHANGELOG.md#0212) [Compare Source](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/compare/v0.21.1...v0.21.2) - Correct `this` in field and accessor decorators ([#3761](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3761)) This release changes the value of `this` in initializers for class field and accessor decorators from the module-level `this` value to the appropriate `this` value for the decorated element (either the class or the instance). It was previously incorrect due to lack of test coverage. Here's an example of a decorator that doesn't work without this change: ```js const dec = () => function() { this.bar = true } class Foo { @dec static foo } console.log(Foo.bar) // Should be "true" ``` - Allow `es2023` as a target environment ([#3762](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3762)) TypeScript recently [added `es2023`](https://github.com/microsoft/TypeScript/pull/58140) as a compilation target, so esbuild now supports this too. There is no difference between a target of `es2022` and `es2023` as far as esbuild is concerned since the 2023 edition of JavaScript doesn't introduce any new syntax features. ### [`v0.21.1`](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/blob/HEAD/CHANGELOG.md#0211) [Compare Source](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/compare/v0.21.0...v0.21.1) - Fix a regression with `--keep-names` ([#3756](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/3756)) The previous release introduced a regression with the `--keep-names` setting and object literals with `get`/`set` accessor methods, in which case the generated code contained syntax errors. This release fixes the regression: ```js // Original code x = { get y() {} } // Output from version 0.21.0 (with --keep-names) x = { get y: /* @__PURE__ */ __name(function() { }, "y") }; // Output from this version (with --keep-names) x = { get y() { } }; ``` ### [`v0.21.0`](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/blob/HEAD/CHANGELOG.md#0210) [Compare Source](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/compare/v0.20.2...v0.21.0) This release doesn't contain any deliberately-breaking changes. However, it contains a very complex new feature and while all of esbuild's tests pass, I would not be surprised if an important edge case turns out to be broken. So I'm releasing this as a breaking change release to avoid causing any trouble. As usual, make sure to test your code when you upgrade. - Implement the JavaScript decorators proposal ([#104](https://github.com/evanw/esbuild/issues/104)) With this release, esbuild now contains an implementation of the upcoming [JavaScript decorators proposal](https://github.com/tc39/proposal-decorators). This is the same feature that shipped in [TypeScript 5.0](https://devblogs.microsoft.com/typescript/announcing-typescript-5-0/#decorators) and has been highly-requested on esbuild's issue tracker. You can read more about them in that blog post and in this other (now slightly outdated) extensive blog post here: https://2ality.com/2022/10/javascript-decorators.html. Here's a quick example: ```js const log = (fn, context) => function() { console.log(`before ${context.name}`) const it = fn.apply(this, arguments) console.log(`after ${context.name}`) return it } class Foo { @log static foo() { console.log('in foo') } } // Logs "before foo", "in foo", "after foo" Foo.foo() ``` Note that this feature is different than the existing "TypeScript experimental decorators" feature that esbuild already implements. It uses similar syntax but behaves very differently, and the two are not compatible (although it's sometimes possible to write decorators that work with both). TypeScript experimental decorators will still be supported by esbuild going forward as they have been around for a long time, are very widely used, and let you do certain things that are not possible with JavaScript decorators (such as decorating function parameters). By default esbuild will parse and transform JavaScript decorators, but you can tell esbuild to parse and transform TypeScript experimental decorators instead by setting `"experimentalDecorators": true` in your `tsconfig.json` file. Probably at least half of the work for this feature went into creating a test suite that exercises many of the proposal's edge cases: https://github.com/evanw/decorator-tests. It has given me a reasonable level of confidence that esbuild's initial implementation is acceptable. However, I don't have access to a significant sample of real code that uses JavaScript decorators. If you're currently using JavaScript decorators in a real code base, please try out esbuild's implementation and let me know if anything seems off. **⚠️ WARNING ⚠️** This proposal has been in the works for a very long time (work began around 10 years ago in 2014) and it is finally getting close to becoming part of the JavaScript language. However, it's still a work in progress and isn't a part of JavaScript yet, so keep in mind that any code that uses JavaScript decorators may need to be updated as the feature continues to evolve. The decorators proposal is pretty close to its final form but it can and likely will undergo some small behavioral adjustments before it ends up becoming a part of the standard. If/when that happens, I will update esbuild's implementation to match the specification. I will not be supporting old versions of the specification. - Optimize the generated code for private methods Previously when lowering private methods for old browsers, esbuild would generate one `WeakSet` for each private method. This mirrors similar logic for generating one `WeakSet` for each private field. Using a separate `WeakMap` for private fields is necessary as their assignment can be observable: ```js let it class Bar { constructor() { it = this } } class Foo extends Bar { #x = 1 #y = null.foo static check() { console.log(#x in it, #y in it) } } try { new Foo } catch {} Foo.check() ``` This prints `true false` because this partially-initialized instance has `#x` but not `#y`. In other words, it's not true that all class instances will always have all of their private fields. However, the assignment of private methods to a class instance is not observable. In other words, it's true that all class instances will always have all of their private methods. This means esbuild can lower private methods into code where all methods share a single `WeakSet`, which is smaller, faster, and uses less memory. Other JavaScript processing tools such as the TypeScript compiler already make this optimization. Here's what this change looks like: ```js // Original code class Foo { #x() { return this.#x() } #y() { return this.#y() } #z() { return this.#z() } } // Old output (--supported:class-private-method=false) var _x, x_fn, _y, y_fn, _z, z_fn; class Foo { constructor() { __privateAdd(this, _x); __privateAdd(this, _y); __privateAdd(this, _z); } } _x = new WeakSet(); x_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _x, x_fn).call(this); }; _y = new WeakSet(); y_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _y, y_fn).call(this); }; _z = new WeakSet(); z_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _z, z_fn).call(this); }; // New output (--supported:class-private-method=false) var _Foo_instances, x_fn, y_fn, z_fn; class Foo { constructor() { __privateAdd(this, _Foo_instances); } } _Foo_instances = new WeakSet(); x_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, x_fn).call(this); }; y_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, y_fn).call(this); }; z_fn = function() { return __privateMethod(this, _Foo_instances, z_fn).call(this); }; ``` - Fix an obscure bug with lowering class members with computed property keys When class members that use newer syntax features are transformed for older target environments, they sometimes need to be relocated. However, care must be taken to not reorder any side effects caused by computed property keys. For example, the following code must evaluate `a()` then `b()` then `c()`: ```js class Foo { [a()]() {} [b()]; static { c() } } ``` Previously esbuild did this by shifting the computed property key *forward* to the next spot in the evaluation order. Classes evaluate all computed keys first and then all static class elements, so if the last computed key needs to be shifted, esbuild previously inserted a static block at start of the class body, ensuring it came before all other static class elements: ```js var _a; class Foo { constructor() { __publicField(this, _a); } static { _a = b(); } [a()]() { } static { c(); } } ``` However, this could cause esbuild to accidentally generate a syntax error if the computed property key contains code that isn't allowed in a static block, such as an `await` expression. With this release, esbuild fixes this problem by shifting the computed property key *backward* to the previous spot in the evaluation order instead, which may push it into the `extends` clause or even before the class itself: ```js // Original code class Foo { [a()]() {} [await b()]; static { c() } } // Old output (with --supported:class-field=false) var _a; class Foo { constructor() { __publicField(this, _a); } static { _a = await b(); } [a()]() { } static { c(); } } // New output (with --supported:class-field=false) var _a, _b; class Foo { constructor() { __publicField(this, _a); } [(_b = a(), _a = await b(), _b)]() { } static { c(); } } ``` - Fix some `--keep-names` edge cases The [`NamedEvaluation` syntax-directed operation](https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-runtime-semantics-namedevaluation) in the JavaScript specification gives certain anonymous expressions a `name` property depending on where they are in the syntax tree. For example, the following initializers convey a `name` value: ```js var foo = function() {} var bar = class {} console.log(foo.name, bar.name) ``` When you enable esbuild's `--keep-names` setting, esbuild generates additional code to represent this `NamedEvaluation` operation so that the value of the `name` property persists even when the identifiers are renamed (e.g. due to minification). However, I recently learned that esbuild's implementation of `NamedEvaluation` is missing a few cases. Specifically esbuild was missing property definitions, class initializers, logical-assignment operators. These cases should now all be handled: ```js var obj = { foo: function() {} } class Foo0 { foo = function() {} } class Foo1 { static foo = function() {} } class Foo2 { accessor foo = function() {} } class Foo3 { static accessor foo = function() {} } foo ||= function() {} foo &&= function() {} foo ??= function() {} ``` </details> --- ### Configuration 📅 **Schedule**: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined). 🚦 **Automerge**: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied. ♻ **Rebasing**: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox. 🔕 **Ignore**: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again. --- - [ ] If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box --- This PR has been generated by [Renovate Bot](https://github.com/renovatebot/renovate).

renovate added 1 commit 2024-05-07 08:05:08 +01:00

renovate/artifacts Artifact file update failure

769271a5ba Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.0

renovate commented

2024-05-07 08:05:08 +01:00

⚠ Artifact update problem

Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is.

♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens:

any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or
the branch becomes conflicted, or
you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or
you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually

The artifact failure details are included below:

File name: package-lock.json

docker: Error response from daemon: <html>
<head><title>403 Forbidden</title></head>
<body>
<center><h1>403 Forbidden</h1></center>
<hr><center>nginx</center>
</body>
</html>.
time="2024-05-12T21:04:51Z" level=error msg="error waiting for container: unexpected EOF"

### ⚠ Artifact update problem Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is. ♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens: - any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or - the branch becomes conflicted, or - you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or - you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually The artifact failure details are included below: ##### File name: package-lock.json ``` docker: Error response from daemon: <html> <head><title>403 Forbidden</title></head> <body> <center><h1>403 Forbidden</h1></center> <hr><center>nginx</center> </body> </html>. time="2024-05-12T21:04:51Z" level=error msg="error waiting for container: unexpected EOF" ```

renovate force-pushed renovate/esbuild-0.x from 769271a5ba to fbe17f5871

2024-05-07 18:04:46 +01:00

Compare

renovate changed title from ~~Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.0~~ to Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.1

2024-05-07 18:04:47 +01:00

renovate changed title from ~~Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.1~~ to Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.2

2024-05-12 22:04:54 +01:00

renovate force-pushed renovate/esbuild-0.x from fbe17f5871 to 63ba3b641c

2024-05-12 22:04:54 +01:00

Compare

renovate changed title from ~~Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.2~~ to Update dependency esbuild to v0.21.3

2024-05-15 22:04:42 +01:00

renovate commented

2024-05-15 22:04:42 +01:00

⚠️ Artifact update problem

Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is.

♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens:

any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or
the branch becomes conflicted, or
you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or
you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually

The artifact failure details are included below:

File name: package-lock.json

docker: Error response from daemon: <html>
<head><title>403 Forbidden</title></head>
<body>
<center><h1>403 Forbidden</h1></center>
<hr><center>nginx</center>
</body>
</html>.
time="2024-05-15T21:04:38Z" level=error msg="error waiting for container: unexpected EOF"

### ⚠️ Artifact update problem Renovate failed to update an artifact related to this branch. You probably do not want to merge this PR as-is. ♻ Renovate will retry this branch, including artifacts, only when one of the following happens: - any of the package files in this branch needs updating, or - the branch becomes conflicted, or - you click the rebase/retry checkbox if found above, or - you rename this PR's title to start with "rebase!" to trigger it manually The artifact failure details are included below: ##### File name: package-lock.json ``` docker: Error response from daemon: <html> <head><title>403 Forbidden</title></head> <body> <center><h1>403 Forbidden</h1></center> <hr><center>nginx</center> </body> </html>. time="2024-05-15T21:04:38Z" level=error msg="error waiting for container: unexpected EOF" ```

renovate force-pushed renovate/esbuild-0.x from 63ba3b641c to 4d2dc0d6ee

2024-05-15 22:04:43 +01:00

Compare

renovate/artifacts Artifact file update failure

This pull request can be merged automatically.

You are not authorized to merge this pull request.

You can also view command line instructions.

Step 1:

From your project repository, check out a new branch and test the changes.

git checkout -b renovate/esbuild-0.x master

git pull origin renovate/esbuild-0.x

Step 2:

Merge the changes and update on Gitea.

git checkout master

git merge --no-ff renovate/esbuild-0.x

git push origin master

Sign in to join this conversation.

No reviewers

No Label

No Milestone

No Assignees

1 Participants

Notifications

Due Date

The due date is invalid or out of range. Please use the format 'yyyy-mm-dd'.

No due date set.

Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: repos/website#124