angular-cn/packages/core
Paul Gschwendtner 0577bf0e3e refactor: enable ng update migrations for v10 (#36921)
Enables the `ng update` migrations for v10. Status for individual
migrations:

**undecorated-classes-with-di**.

This migration dealt exlusively with inherited constructors and
cases where a derived component was undecorated. In those cases,
the migration added `@Directive()` or copied the inherited decorator
to the derived class.

We don't need to run this migration again because ngtsc throws if
constructor is inherited from an undecorated class. Also ngtsc will
throw if a NgModule references an undecorated class in the declarations.

***undecorated-classes-with-decorated-fields***

This migration exclusively deals with undecorated classes that use
Angular features but are not decorated. Angular features include
the use of lifecycle hooks or class fields with Angular decorators,
such as `@Input()`.

We want to re-run this migration in v10 as we will disable the
compatibility code in ngtsc that detects such undecorated classes
as `@Directive`.

**module-with-providers**:

This migration adds an explicit generic type to `ModuleWithProviders`.
As of v10, the generic type is required, so we need to re-run the
migration again.

**renderer-to-renderer2**:

We don't need to re-run that migration again as the
renderer has been already removed in v9.

**missing-injectable**:

This migration is exclusively concerned with undecorated
providers referenced in an `NgModule`. We should re-run
that migration again as we don't have proper backsliding
prevention for this yet. We can consider adding an error
in ngtsc for v10, or v11. In either way, we should re-run
the migration.

**dynamic-queries**:

We ran this one in v9 to reduce code complexity in projects. Instead
of explicitly passing `static: false`, not passing any object literal
has the same semantics. We don't need to re-run the migration again
since there is no good way to prevent backsliding and we cannot always
run this migration for future versions (as some apps might actually
intentionally use the explicit `static: false` option).

PR Close #36921
2020-05-06 15:06:10 -07:00
..
global docs(ivy): document global debugging utilities and clean up API (#34453) 2020-01-30 11:30:32 -08:00
schematics refactor: enable ng update migrations for v10 (#36921) 2020-05-06 15:06:10 -07:00
src refactor(core): make generic mandatory for ModuleWithProviders (#36892) 2020-05-06 15:01:34 -07:00
test refactor: disable sanitization for [style] and [style.prop] bindings (#35621) 2020-05-06 15:00:22 -07:00
testing build: simplify package.jsons for all of our packages (#36944) 2020-05-06 13:54:26 -07:00
BUILD.bazel build: provide full paths to `ts_api_guardian_test_npm_package` and `ts_api_guardian_test` (#36034) 2020-03-12 09:49:00 -07:00
PACKAGE.md docs: add package doc files (#26047) 2018-10-05 15:42:14 -07:00
index.ts refactor: move angular source to /packages rather than modules/@angular 2017-03-08 16:29:27 -08:00
package.json build: simplify package.jsons for all of our packages (#36944) 2020-05-06 13:54:26 -07:00
public_api.ts build: publish tree of files rather than FESMs (#18541) 2017-08-31 15:34:50 -07:00