feat: add pnpm as optional package manager

[GeoffreyBooth]

This adds support for pnpm like we have for Yarn, resolving #1017. It also adds pnpm itself to the list of packages to test, though I don’t know if it will pass in all our environments. That’s the second commit and can be excluded if we want.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: 4 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (eae7346) 96.44% compared to head (1ae5c4b) 96.32%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1020      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   96.44%   96.32%   -0.13%     
==========================================
  Files          28       28              
  Lines        2139     2177      +38     
==========================================
+ Hits         2063     2097      +34     
- Misses         76       80       +4     

Files	Coverage Δ
lib/bin/citgm-all.js	95.35% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
lib/bin/citgm.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/citgm.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/common-args.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/grab-project.js	96.12% <100.00%> (+0.12%)	⬆️
lib/package-manager/get-executable.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/package-manager/index.js	100.00% <100.00%> (ø)
lib/package-manager/test.js	99.37% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
lib/lookup.js	91.07% <33.33%> (-0.83%)	⬇️
lib/package-manager/install.js	96.91% <88.88%> (-1.06%)	⬇️

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[GeoffreyBooth]

Should I keep pnpm in the lookup.json in this PR or separate it? How can I test that it passes in all the environments that we run CITGM before I land it?

[targos]

Should I keep pnpm in the lookup.json in this PR or separate it?

Let's keep it. It's a good way to test the new code paths.

How can I test that it passes in all the environments that we run CITGM before I land it?

A good first step before trying all environments is to start https://github.com/nodejs/citgm/actions/workflows/test-module.yml

https://github.com/nodejs/citgm/actions/runs/6612820965

[targos]

LGTM but don't merge until we're sure pnpm passes (or is skipped) on all supported platforms.

[targos]

pnpm tests don't pass.

[Ethan-Arrowood]

this looks excellent. Thank you!

[GeoffreyBooth]

Let's keep it. It's a good way to test the new code paths.

Well or we could add Next, that would also test the code paths. @Ethan-Arrowood what would the best commands be to build and test Next within CITGM?

[Ethan-Arrowood]

Not sure - I actually don't work on Next.js at all. But I will surface this with them. May not get a response until later as they are about to launch Next.js Conf and its all-hands-on-deck for that.

[GeoffreyBooth]

I opened https://github.com/orgs/pnpm/discussions/7239 to ask the pnpm team about this.

[targos]

New run: https://github.com/nodejs/citgm/actions/runs/6612820965

[GeoffreyBooth]

nodejs/citgm/actions/runs/6612820965

How exactly do you run these? I see “Run workflow,” what settings are you choosing?

[targos]

You can see the parameters logged here: https://github.com/nodejs/citgm/actions/runs/6612820965/job/18230215140

[GeoffreyBooth]

So like this?

Why are there separate settings for CITGM branch and ref? Aren’t those the same thing?

Anyway we seem to be making progress; it’s passing in some platforms/versions now: https://github.com/nodejs/citgm/actions/runs/6748209270

[targos]

The first param (branch) should usually stay as main. It's the branch to use for the workflow file itself.

[GeoffreyBooth]

Based on https://github.com/orgs/pnpm/discussions/7239#discussioncomment-7474442 it might take awhile before pnpm has a test suite that is consistently passing in CITGM. Perhaps I should remove the second commit from this PR, that adds pnpm to lookup.json, and just land the core support for pnpm as a package manager in CITGM? Then we can at least add other packages that depend on pnpm, such as Next, and add pnpm as a module under test whenever it’s ready.

[targos]

SGTM

[GeoffreyBooth]

@targos I’ve dropped the lookup.json commit. Do you want to land this? Then I can open a second PR with that other commit, and it can stay open until we get a usable test suite for pnpm.