Request’s Past, Present and Future
mikeal opened this issue · comments
Before I go into the details and reasoning I’ll get straight to the point. The most valuable thing request can do for the JavaScript ecosystem is to go into maintenance mode and stop considering new features or major releases.
Apologies in advance to the other committers on request that have been doing their best to improve it, but it’s for the best.
2009
The first version of request was one of the first modules ever created for the Node.js ecosystem. The earliest versions were written to APIs that pre-date the standard callback interface, streams, node_modules and npm. For the first few years, request and Node.js evolved together, each learning from the other. As Node.js improved and migrated core interfaces so did request. As request adopted changes to the core http library and streams it also informed improvements like the pipe event (which enabled request’s one line proxy) and one of Core http’s many re-writes (the one I had to write).
npm
request was one of the first modules added to the npm registry. As npm grew so did dependence on request. Even now, when npm is used far more for front-end than back-end work, request remains one of the most depended on modules in the registry. As I write this, 41K modules depend on request and it is downloaded 14 million times a week.
The place request has in the Node.js ecosystem is no longer one of an innovator but of an incumbent. If you Google for how to do something with HTTP in Node.js the examples are likely to show request as the client and express as the server. This has two notably bad effects.
It’s much harder for new libraries accomplishing similar tasks to gain adoption because of the incumbent position request holds over the ecosystem. It’s also very hard to change request in any meaningful way as the change not only may not be adopted by the majority of its dependents but it would put it out of alignment with the thousands of blog posts and stack overflow responses that use request.
Modern JavaScript
The last few years have been dramatic ones in JavaScript. Features people had talked about for years went from ideas, to standards, to features you can reliably depend on in most environments. The speed at which these have been adopted is staggering, mostly thanks to auto-updating browsers and an aggressive Node.js release schedule.
The patterns at the core of request are out of date. A few people might argue with that assessment, and I know who they are so I won’t be surprised, but it’s true. I have often been skeptical of the impact some of these features would have only to find myself adopting them wholesale not long after they are available in only the latest release of Node.js.
There’s a transition happening now in the ecosystem to these patterns. How messy that will be is still up in the air and I’m not going to try and read the tea leafs and figure out what the future looks like in that regard. The question for request is “Do we try to survive through that transition?” A year ago, I thought the answer was obvious and that we would, but now I’m convinced of the opposite.
A version of request written to truly embrace these new language patterns is, effectively, a new module. I’ve explored this space a bit already and have a project I’m quite happy with but it is incompatible with request in every conceivable way. What’s the value in a version of request that is incompatible with the old patterns yet not fully embracing the new ones? What’s the point in being partially compatible when there’s a whole world of new modules, written by new developers, that are re-thinking these problems with these patterns in mind?
The best thing for these new modules is for request to slowly fade away, eventually becoming just another memory of that legacy stack. Taking the position request has now and leveraging it for a bigger share of the next generation of developers would be a disservice to those developers as it would drive them away from better modules that don’t have the burden of request’s history.
Maintenance Mode
Here’s the plan.
requestwill stop accepting new features.requestwill stop considering breaking changes.- The committers that are still active will try to merge fixes in a timely fashion, no promises though.
- Releases will be fully automated, any merge into master will be published. I’ve already built this for some other projects using GitHub Actions.
- We’re going to have to remove inactive collaborators and enforce 2fa, because commit rights will effectively become npm publish rights.
I fully support this, I think a warning message and/or deprecating new releases is in order.
As for the change in process and guidelines, it makes my job a lot easier 👌
Things we might do - please discuss and volunteer!
- update readme with current state of project
- update ci publishing pipeline @mikeal
- provide a doc with some guidance on
requestalternatives #3143 - add a warning message on install of the package to use another package and reference the doc
- pick a date to stop support (I vote 6 months, but 12 is probably friendlier)
- close all feature requests and feature prs
- review and merge relevant bug fixes
- add github issue and pr templates explaining that features wont be merged
- deprecate the next major version (
3.x) so project’s in active maintenance get a warning but older projects continue as usual
It makes a lot of sense! I will slowly adopt this policy for the request-promise family as well. Cheers to your important contributions to the node ecosystem!
deprecate the latest npm package and auto deprecate them on publish
Please be careful about deprecation. As Mikael wrote above, there are 41K modules depending on request. Many of these modules are useful in the current state and work well for their users, but their maintainers may not have time to rework those modules to use something else than request. By deprecating request at install time, you will basically deprecate a large portion of npm module ecosystem.
As I see it, maintenance mode is not the same thing as deprecation.
- Maintenance mode = we will fix bugs and security vulnerabilities so that you can keep using this package.
- Deprecation = nobody should be using this package any more. This typically happens when the module is abandoned and won't receive any further bug or security fixes.
I hear you. The full text
deprecate the latest npm package and auto deprecate them on publish via ci (maybe after support has been stopped?)
I think we should eventually deprecate request because I don't want new projects to use it.
I've been trying to triage the issues and prs down to a list we can solve, but there are bugs that we cannot fix without a breaking change. Therefore they wont get fixed and new users will have issues.
For example following redirects looses request bodies and cookies, and url parsing to remove relative paths are both bugs but I'm not sure they'll ever be fixed.
Maybe deprecation isn't the right answer, but I don't know how else to approach that.
Does that make sense?
Let’s just bump the major version when we deprecate. That way most people depending on the project won’t see this error until they try to upgrade to a new major, which means they are actively developing it and really should look for an alternative.
I'm proud to have been part of the history of request. I will also check out bent, it looks interesting, and small, which is more important to me these days.
We’re going to have to remove inactive collaborators and enforce 2fa, because commit rights will effectively become npm publish rights.
Fine to remove me.
I think we should eventually deprecate request because I don't want new projects to use it.
As a programmer who is VERY grateful for the module and who uses it all the time I WANT to use it on new projects.
This decision must have been very hard to take but is commendable in the extreme. Well done.
I'm proud having used this amazing tool. It forced the community to improve. 🙏
If you need help to maintain it do not hesitate to contact me.
While I respect your decision, I would ask you to consider how much real world, production, code relies on request currently. It's far more than even NPM stats can tell you. I fully understand wanting to move on to a new thing and doing something in a new, more interesting way...this is the JavaScript ecosystem after all, have to chase the new thing. But please consider the amount of time and money you'd be costing professional engineering organizations by wholesale deprecating request. If you want to leave it in maintenance mode, that's fine, but understand that plenty of people have absolutely no practical reason to change libraries. Forcing people to change because of ideology is going to lead to frustration.
Regardless, thanks for the hard work everyone has put in to this library.
I wonder what library could be considered modern and recommended now. Superagent is mostly in maintenance mode right now, axios not too active altogether.
Just a quick note to say thank you (and all the other contributors) for all the hard work over the years on this module; it was one of the first I ever used back when I started with Node so will always have a special place in my heart.
Let’s just bump the major version when we deprecate. That way most people depending on the project won’t see this error until they try to upgrade to a new major, which means they are actively developing it and really should look for an alternative.
i think this is still a viable solution for the mention above.
@kibertoad Looks like @mikeal is working on https://github.com/mikeal/bent. I've been using https://github.com/sindresorhus/got for many years and it's well supported and evolving.
With all this talk and the possibility of it being deprecated, I think there has to be equal mention of a current maturity replacement module, of parallel utility. We can't just announce its end and then suggest nothing, or a replacement of much less maturity and confidence. Request is used in serious applications. Why does this matter? Because for all its "outdated patterns at its core", it works on a daily basis, for thousands. This is not about the perfect world but the real world. What is the real world replacement, of confidence, on the day request is put in maintenance mode or is deprecated? That is an imperative.
You can find that discussion over here #3143
You can find a current working plan (which direct feedback is welcome) can be found here #3142 (comment)
Thanks for your work on request!
The patterns at the core of request are out of date.
Patterns change every few months and years, especially in JavaScript community. Aren't the reasons why request was originally created are still valid today?
request has 10 years of commits, stability and tests. Why start from scratch? Isn't this just adding more "JavaScript fatigue", resulting in more libraries doing the same thing - HTTP requests?
It's sad to see such an important and historic library in Node's history go away because streams and callbacks are not fancy in 2019 anymore.
I don't believe that deprecating the library is really needed, it's been around for about 10 years now, used in lots of places and is actually pretty stable, and in the end. all it does is make HTTP requests, what else would the library need? Support for the JS fad of the month? 👎
The committers that are still active will try to merge fixes in a timely fashion, no promises though.
ba-dum-chhh! 🥁
This is responsible deprecation. Well communicated, with a plan to follow through on. I think other OSS maintainers can look to this as a standard to aim for.
This is much better than forgetting about a package and letting random people (who can inject back-doors into the code) in as maintainers to take over when you no longer care.
Request was a great package, and we thank you tremendously for your contributions to the early node ecosystem. You are right in your assessment that callback style is no longer idiomatic JavaScript, and there are other packages like fetch which mirror WHATWG standards.
@stcktrce Exactly, the library doesn't need anything else, it works just as it is. But there has been major improvements in the whole ecosystem. Deprecating the library is just marking the opportunity for others to check new and more modern libraries instead of simply relying on the most popular out there.
@mikeal thank you for all your efforts in the library (r2 too) and the ecosystem. Also, for setting this precedence of a well thought through and planned deprecation in the ecosystem.
Let’s just bump the major version when we deprecate. That way most people depending on the project won’t see this error until they try to upgrade to a new major, which means they are actively developing it and really should look for an alternative.
@mikeal I don't think that's a good idea.
The problem is that most of replacements are of lower quality than request. I just moved to request from axios about a week ago.
Axios has multi-year persistent bugs around proxy support, modifying https agents, and unhandled promise exceptions. You only find these out after investing into axios heavily.
To new users axios looks superficially as good as request (similar number of users, promises by design, etc)
Thanks for request :)
If anybody is looking for a minimal promise-based HTTP library with pluggable filters and good support for streams you could check out httplease. We've been using it for a few years in production.
I love the request module.Thanks a lot.
You mean request get too much focus to prevent other same new module come out?
If there are specific bugs in comparable features in other libraries I’d like to specifically identify them. Proxy support is a complex feature and having a test case that request passes but other libraries fail is very valuable.
@reconbot in the latest axios (^0.18.0) you can't connect to a https site through a proxy server. doing so results in EPROTO errors. this is an open bug regarding this, but the issue goes back years: axios/axios#1981
edit: specifically, you can't use axios to do https requests via a http proxy. maybe a dedicated https proxy works, didn't try that.
I sure hope fixes are not considered new features, such as my pull request for Maximum Response Size, which I see as a standard required feature of any mature library.
Also I did review other request libs before I choose this one and most of them are very problematic, incomplete and buggy. Their docs do not measure either. I do not really see what can another library bring but untested code and bugs, it's not like there's a new approach to making HTTP requests. It's all about wrapping http/https module and providing sane defaults such as buffering response, decoding responses, and of course the ability to promisify the whole thing. The biggest problem of this library here is the aim of total compatibility, trying to be compatible with legacy stuff only brings pain and legacy coding practices. But this can be fixed in many ways. There's a good base that can be refactored into something elegant, modern and minimalist. And most of all reliable. There are many ways to do this - split into more files, use ECMA6 with Babel or Typescript.
No sane developer wants 10 libraries that do the same thing but lack different features, are buggy, undocumented. This library really works and I am thankful for it and hope that it's not deprecated but instead revived.
TIL 41k packages just became vulnerable.
Look, I agree that request should go away, but I’m always fearful of mainstream packages like this changing their release pipeline. One bad actor or one compromised dev box publishing malicious code would effectively spread to every project out there.
Please consider tightening the npm push requirements. Set up a branch for ci, require multiple approvals, something more than simply pushing to master.
no promises though.
Pun intended? 🤣
maybe the same logical reasoning should be applied to expressjs? for request we now have the new shiny got module, there is no re-write or true alternative to expressjs on the horizon.
express is great, but it is not really actively updated with new features these years
express may not be updated with new features but it is actively maintained and, last time i checked, has a few people still quite interested in doing that work. i don’t know that they need to take the steps we’ve taken towards deprecation.
@laoshaw what has express anything to do with request?
Preparing full deprecation. #3267
We are fully deprecated!
All versions on npm note the deprecation and the README notes clearly that request has been deprecated.
It’s been a great 10+ years, thanks to everyone who contributed over the last decade. Let’s all look forward to new libraries that are better suited for the changes that are occurring in the JS language and ecosystem.
So lets get SPECIFIC.
What is the lean code replacement for the request module?
Not to be left hanging on dead crust.... so many better options... like WHICH ones?
Not GRAND do everything under the sun libraries/modules, please.
@riclf we've been using https://github.com/googleapis/teeny-request/ to help ween us off of request for a few years. It does not do everything you are going to want it to do :) It uses node-fetch under the hood. There are other great options out there too!
For a promise-first solution there's also gofer which is heavily focussed on API communication. Support for TCP connect timeouts built-in, easy configuration (and rich errors) for talking to multiple APIs, etc..
Does anyone have any recommendations for alternative clients that have good support for HTTP Long Polling and presents as either a Stream or Event Emitter?
The last time I checked in April 2019, alternatives like got, node-fetch and axios had a major problem: when a (low-level networking) error happened, they discarded the helpful stack trace reported by Node.js core and threw a new high-level error with a stack trace pointing to the http client library only. This made debugging transport-level issues pretty much impossible, for example when proxies are involved.
Is there any good request alternative that preserves error details provided by Node.js core?
@bajtos I'm pretty sure gofer only decorates the original errors but should preserve the stack traces and messages.
bent has nice errors and is designed for async/await. It’s also incredibly small and the bundle size is teeny tiny ;)
The API is nothing like request though, so I wouldn’t call it a “replacement.”
@mikeal Why is it called bent? (request was an easier name to remember.)
benthas nice errors and is designed for async/await. It’s also incredibly small and the bundle size is teeny tiny ;)The API is nothing like request though, so I wouldn’t call it a “replacement.”
This feels very much like technically correct rather than user-friendly logic. From the user perspective bent solves the same problem as request but better. Now it's stuck with a worse name for no reason. You can call it request 3 without much issue imo. Yes the API is breaking but what's what we have semver for.
You can call it request 3 without much issue imo. Yes the API is breaking but what's what we have semver for.
Spend some time with bent and you may feel differently.
It’s not a small difference in naming or promises vs callbacks. The ergonomics are very different, the states it surfaces are very different, the way it thinks about error conditions is a radically different approach.
request is a more procedural API, you tell it to do something and it tells you what happened, it only gives an error if something irrecoverably failed. bent takes the success criteria for the entire lifecycle and returns you an API that will fail if anything but the success criteria is met.
You use these libraries very differently. There are other libraries that are closer to request’s API if that is what you want, but after almost 20 years of working on HTTP clients I’ve found a different and ultimately better approach that I’d encourage people to consider, but I’m not going to ram it down everyone’s throats by making it request 3.0.
Why is it called bent? (request was an easier name to remember.)
Because you “bend” it into a specific shape (very particular success criteria) and it provides an ideal API for the success of that shape and fails on anything but it.
The name is a bit abstract, but request is the kind of name you could never get today. I barely got request in the npm registry and I wrote the original npm registry 😜
what about "got" as a replacement, it's sad we don't have a clear replacement while request is officially deprecated.
what about "got" as a replacement, it's sad we don't have a clear replacement while request is officially deprecated.
Maybe we should take the fact that nobody has written an API compatible replacement as an indication that adopting an API compatible replacement is undesirable once you sit down and work on it 🧐
That was certainly my experience.
Perhaps what people really want when they ask for a "replacement", is not so much an API compatible alternative, but the maintainer perspective on what other packages are already out there to solve roughly the same problem and that are making this package irrelevant so that you can confidently call it "deprecated".
And I'd say advertising bent in the deprecation notice (possibly along with some others, if that makes you feel more comfortable) is a great way to start getting it known despite the obscure naming.
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see https://github.com/request/request/issues/3142
npm ERR! code E404
npm ERR! 404 Not Found: error-ex@^1.3.1
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! C:\Users\Ammar\AppData\Roaming\npm-cache\_logs\2020-02-12T04_18_22_538Z-debug.log
Do you really understand what "deprecated" really means?
Deprecated. In the world of software development, "deprecated" refers to functions or elements that are in the process of being replaced by newer ones. The term comes from the word "deprecate," which means to disapprove of something.
In practice this means that when I maintain any of my (non open source) modules I'll get silly error messages.
What about the 151 issues and the 55 pull requests? Dump them?
And I'd say advertising bent in the deprecation notice (possibly with others if that makes you feel more comfortable) is a great way to start getting it known, despite the obscure naming.
This is FAR too early - see issue 2 of bent.
I think that request should go into a limbo mode - not deprecated which causes silly warnings - but where NOTHING will be undertaken, all issues and pulls will be ignored and the README page should be updated to note this and, when appropiate, references will be included to other functionally equivalent packages.
What about the 151 issues and the 55 pull requests? Dump them?
Nobody has been fixing or reviewing these for some time, they were already “dumped.”
Your comments make it sound as though there is some kind of dedicated labor in this project that people are entitled to. This has never been the case, request is not a product released and backed by a company, it has always been maintained by open source developers who care and as the ecosystem has moved in a new direction we all moved with it. I recommend you move on as well.
Nobody has been fixing or reviewing these for some time, they were already “dumped.”
What you mean is that YOU have not been reviewing these for some time. Be fair, we who are not collaboraters have no control over this.
Your comments make it sound as though there is some kind of dedicated labor in this project that people are entitled to.
I didn't mean it like that, but in a sense it is true, Open Source Software grants certain rights to the User as well as protecting the rights of the developer. These rights are of usage not of maintainance. When maintainance or futher development involves breaking changes, much care and thought needs to be taken. This is a breaking change and in my opinion unnecessary. Just leave the module as it is and we'll all move on with the next project - particularly if the alternative offers advantages. Indeed we'd be silly not to do so. But as far as I can see there is at the moment no real alternative.
Open Source Software grants certain rights to the User
OSS licenses provide rights to re-distribute and modify, no guarantees of any kind are made on the suitability of the software for any particular use. No guarantees are ever made on future changes, including potential breaking changes.
Here’s the relevant text from the Apache 2 license. Pretty much every open source license has this.
“Licensor provides the Work (and each Contributor provides its Contributions) on an "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied, including, without limitation, any warranties or conditions of TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MERCHANTABILITY, or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. You are solely responsible for determining the appropriateness of using or redistributing the Work and assume any risks associated with Your exercise of permissions under this License.”
This is a breaking change and in my opinion unnecessary. Just leave the module as it is and we'll all move on with the next project - particularly if the alternative offers advantages. Indeed we'd be silly not to do so. But as far as I can see there is at the moment no real alternative.
Here’s the thing. This code has known bugs that won’t be fixed. This code is no longer maintained and is deprecated.
The deprecation warning is a notice that you’re relying on problematic code. If you’re fine relying on deprecated and problematic code then simply suppress the messages. Your issue seems to be the warnings and not the state of the software. If you’re fine with the state of the software then simply suppress the warnings.
We will not be altering the deprecation state and relevant warnings to be out of line with reality in order to satisfy any particular user’s concern over warnings they can easily suppress if they are unconcerned about relying on deprecated modules.
need help!!!..i am having this issues when i try to install node-gyp 3.6.2
PS C:\Users\User> npm install --global node-gyp@3.6.2
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
npm ERR! path C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\npm\node-gyp.cmd
npm ERR! code EEXIST
npm ERR! Refusing to delete C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\npm\node-gyp.cmd: is outside C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules\node-gyp and not a link
npm ERR! File exists: C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\npm\node-gyp.cmd
npm ERR! Move it away, and try again.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! C:\Users\User\AppData\Roaming\npm-cache_logs\2020-02-13T05_12_13_683Z-debug.log
Goodnight request. See you on the other side.
request is going to work forever (as it is), because that's JavaScript .. well unless Node introduces a breaking change by deprecating a core API used by it
request is going to work forever (as it is), because that's JavaScript .. well unless Node introduces a breaking change by deprecating a core API used by it
Nope.
This code has known bugs that won’t be fixed. This code is no longer maintained and is deprecated. (cit.)
So request is gonna have unfixed bugs forever is not going to work forever ...
I don't get it. So what am I suppose to officially do now, not to get the deprecation warning?
Remove request. This may involve removing it from your own dependencies, upgrading packages that remove it in newer versions, or removing packages that haven't been updated with newer versions yet.
Hello.
I am trying to install cordova.
npm install -g cordova
i keep receiving this error.
Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.18362.592]
(c) 2019 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
C:\Users>npm install -g cordova
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
C:\Users\AppData\Roaming\npm\cordova -> C:\Users\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules\cordova\bin\cordova
- cordova@9.0.0
updated 1 package in 10.279s
Is there another way to install Cordova?
A way around this buy?
Yes. Ok. I'll remove request. But what then?
So on node.js I have to switch to.. idk.. axios?
What am I suppose to put in reqest's place?
I understand the idea is to rewrite all the functions where request was present?
Is there a package I could just change with find&replace with regex?
Is there an official replacement for request or are we just set free now to find whatever comes up first on google? I don't get it
Is there an official replacement for request
No, you can use whatever you want, though the same developer is working on bent
There is also the postman-request fork which has received a number of fixes, but it hasn't had any activity since the deprecation of request.
Because they don't have an issues page I suppose I'll try asking here:
@coditva @codenirvana @shamasis @vikiCoder @czardoz
Apologies for the mentions, but what are the plans moving forward for postman-request now that request is officially dead? Will postman-request continue to be maintained, or will it also be deprecated?
need help!!! I'm trying to install angular,i have an issue
npm install -g @angular/cli
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
npm ERR! code EEXIST
npm ERR! path C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng
npm ERR! dest C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! EEXIST: file already exists, cmd shim 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng' -> 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd'
npm ERR! File exists: C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! Remove the existing file and try again, or run npm
npm ERR! with --force to overwrite files recklessly.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm-cache_logs\2020-02-15T09_52_19_067Z-debug.log
What are the alternatives to request? Angular is still dependant on it. Hope they will be updating their codebase soon.
I have a short term solution which Mikeal Rogers will recoil at, maybe even lash out at me for. This current deprecation came in 2 unscheduled phases- 1) a General Discussion of its necessity, 2) BANG, about a 30 minute notice and it was implemented. All hell has broken loose.
I ask @mikeal if he would consider rolling back the deprecation today, and announce a 6 month "Notice of Depreciation", which will be implemented on, and completely effected on August 15, 2020.
The 3 Phases-
- Discussion: March 20, 2019 through February 15, 2020
- 6 Month Notice of Deprecation: February 15, 2020
- Implementation of Deprecation: August 15, 2020
This way, not only are frameworks and application projects NOT instantly broken, which is just too harsh, but this community can now use THIS discussion area to share alternatives, the +/-'s over the next few months and get the alternatives in place by the 6 mo deadline. Then when it happens we can all salute it, yell cheerio, and nothing is broken.
Please, understand, I am not making any argument about the necessity for it's deprecation, or right of the creator to do it... I am suggesting a the 3-step prior notice schedule, as stated above, which will account for its very significant usage in the developer community, and the apps alive in the world today depending on the request module.
Mikeal, please, consider my suggestion, and remove the Deprecation status today and announce the 6 month notice. Less than 6 months is not enough time for many of us, 6 is fair. I would appreciate that, we all would.
Many thanks for hearing me,
-Ric Fink
Adding a deprecation warning doesn't break anything though, it just warns users that it could be broken in the future. I'd rather see a deprecation message sooner than have to wait for community discussion before knowing that I'll eventually have to replace a package.
Also, friendly reminder that this package was being developed via open source free of charge, and the maintainer doesn't owe you anything. If you'd like to continue using the package, you can fork it and continue maintaining it yourself.
need help!!! I'm trying to install angular,i have an issue
npm install -g @angular/cli
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
npm ERR! code EEXIST
npm ERR! path C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng
npm ERR! dest C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! EEXIST: file already exists, cmd shim 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng' -> 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd'
npm ERR! File exists: C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! Remove the existing file and try again, or run npm
npm ERR! with --force to overwrite files recklessly.npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm-cache_logs\2020-02-15T09_52_19_067Z-debug.log
This seems to have been solved by the latest release of Angular in which request is replaced with node-fetch.
@AURZeeshan
Your error does not relate to this. You are just seeing a warning from this package, the error is different.
need help!!! I'm trying to install angular,i have an issue
npm install -g @angular/cli
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
npm ERR! code EEXIST
npm ERR! path C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng
npm ERR! dest C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! EEXIST: file already exists, cmd shim 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\node_modules@angular\cli\bin\ng' -> 'C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd'
npm ERR! File exists: C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm\ng.cmd
npm ERR! Remove the existing file and try again, or run npm
npm ERR! with --force to overwrite files recklessly.
npm ERR! A complete log of this run can be found in:
npm ERR! C:\Users\FARHAN\AppData\Roaming\npm-cache_logs\2020-02-15T09_52_19_067Z-debug.logThis seems to have been solved by the latest release of Angular in which
requestis replaced withnode-fetch.
I installed the latest CLI version. It still throws the same warning
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see https://github.com/request/request/issues/3142
@vighnesh153 What version of @angular/cli is specified in your package.json? It seems that some of the dependencies need request but not the base package itself. See http://npm.anvaka.com/#/view/2d/%2540angular%252Fcli
Perhaps you are right. I am not quite sure which of the packages is using the request-package. Here's a snap of the deps:
"dependencies": {
"@angular/animations": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/common": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/compiler": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/core": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/forms": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/platform-browser": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/platform-browser-dynamic": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/router": "~9.0.1",
"rxjs": "~6.5.4",
"tslib": "^1.10.0",
"zone.js": "~0.10.2"
},
"devDependencies": {
"@angular-devkit/build-angular": "~0.900.2",
"@angular/cli": "~9.0.2",
"@angular/compiler-cli": "~9.0.1",
"@angular/language-service": "~9.0.1",
"@types/node": "^12.11.1",
"@types/jasmine": "~3.5.0",
"@types/jasminewd2": "~2.0.3",
"codelyzer": "^5.1.2",
"jasmine-core": "~3.5.0",
"jasmine-spec-reporter": "~4.2.1",
"karma": "~4.3.0",
"karma-chrome-launcher": "~3.1.0",
"karma-coverage-istanbul-reporter": "~2.1.0",
"karma-jasmine": "~2.0.1",
"karma-jasmine-html-reporter": "^1.4.2",
"protractor": "~5.4.3",
"ts-node": "~8.3.0",
"tslint": "~5.18.0",
"typescript": "~3.7.5"
}
npm install
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
when I want complete "npm install" in \vue-devtools-dev, I have warn about this
how can I solve it ?
I totally respect your decision to deprecate it and wish you the best for the future.
As for people coming to the thread looking for "so what should I use from now on ??", gotor axios are what you're looking for.
Pathetic. Time to migrate to node-fetch.
...except you yourself question if node-fetch is a good replacement for request, or even actively maintained. Pathetic indeed.
Btw, people who are opting for node-fetch really need to be careful. That lib, while great, has severe maintenance issues of its own.
Pathetic. Time to migrate to node-fetch.
...except you yourself question if
node-fetchis a good replacement forrequest, or even actively maintained. Pathetic indeed.
At least node-fetch is not deprecated. Hard deprecation of the request has caused troubles with autobuild systems. I dont understand and dont accept this move and in my opinion simple note explaining that the lib is unmaintained would be enough instead of hard deprecation. Thats why I consider this situation pathetic.
in my opinion simple note explaining that the lib is unmaintained would be enough
That's exactly what a deprecation notice is: a simple note.
@asgetz all npm does is print that warning when installing a deprecated package, everything else works exactly as it did before.
I am having issues with less.js files working on github. They work fine within PHP. When I tried to put less in the command, this warning popped up. Any ideas on what the issue is?
@ljwestwhos request is marked as deprecated, the text of the issue you are commenting on explains what that implies. However, it most likely has nothing to do with your problem with less.js, since request still works like it did before.
Is there a replacement for request, but with node.js's stream interface? I found that node-fetch, axios are both based on Promise.
I would like to know a replacement for stream interface, which is more convenient for lower level use cases.
@maple3142 got has a stream interface (as well as promises) and a migration guide.
npm is indicating to me that I have to install it myself now.
It what way is it indicating that. When I install request I just get the deprecation notice and everything works as before.
my planned use for it is so small
It that case, maybe take a look at bent which is far lighter weight and seems to work nicely.
@kauegimenes this package is deprecated ... nothing will be fixed ever again
@kevinvanrijn I'm not actively involved in maintaining postman-request anymore, but the project is definitely alive and the last release was a month ago. I will let the active maintainers chime in on the longer term plans though.
@czardoz That's good to know. I have a bunch of small projects (all private) depending on request that I can't spend time on rewriting. Dropping postman-request in as a replacement means I can rely on them to continue functioning for just a little while longer.
cloudscraper is also suffering from slow maintenance and will likely not be able to move away from request just yet. Having postman-request available as an option means it'll at least not be at risk of becoming deprecated itself.
@Edo78 why you say that? i still have faith one day my PR will get merged 😆
The committers that are still active will try to merge fixes in a timely fashion, no promises though.
Btw, people who are opting for node-fetch really need to be careful. That lib, while great, has severe maintenance issues of its own.
@csvan Can you explain a bit? I'm only seeing a few issues
I know very little about npm. I used it to install an API and I got some warnings I do not understand. They direct me here. This is totally useless for me. Someone should post something here that is useful for those of us directed here or the message in npm should be fixed to be more useful. The following is the messages I got.
npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142
npm WARN saveError ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'C:\Users\Sam\package.json'
npm notice created a lockfile as package-lock.json. You should commit this file.
npm WARN enoent ENOENT: no such file or directory, open 'C:\Users\Sam\package.json'
npm WARN Sam No description
npm WARN Sam No repository field.
npm WARN Sam No README data
npm WARN Sam No license field.
Also, there is no package.json file but there is a package-lock.json. I have no idea what to look for there.
@SimpleSamples the package is deprecated and will not be actively maintained apart from possible bug fixes, as the text clearly explains. NPM is simply warning you that you are using a deprecated package, so that you have the opportunity to switch to something else.
If you do not understand what deprecation means, there are several useful articles a Google search away.
If it is only saying that Request is deprecated than that is all it needs to say
Yeah, f*ck anyone who appreciates context and likes to know reasons for decisions or wanting to know particulars about the phase-out. :P
To be serious though, if there was an added "as to why" to the warning, would that have prevented your confusion?
"npm WARN deprecated request@2.88.2: request has been deprecated, see #3142 as to why"