为什么我会选择 yarn 的 "resolutions" 而不是显式依赖？
Why would I choose yarn's "resolutions" over an explicit dependency?
我正在阅读 yarn resolutions RFC 并停在了这里：
The devDependencies, optionalDependencies and dependencies fields always take precedence over the resolutions field: if the user defines explicitly a dependency there, it means that he wants that version, even if it's specified with a non-exact specification. So the resolutions field only applies to nested-dependencies. Nevertheless, in case of incompatibility between the specification of a non-nested dependency version and a resolution, a warning is issued.
如果我可以通过通常的依赖项字段强制执行依赖项的版本，我为什么要选择（看似）更复杂的 "resolutions" 字段？
您可以通过通常的依赖项字段强制执行依赖项的版本，仅适用于直接包依赖项，而不是那些依赖项的依赖项。 resolutions 字段需要在整个项目中为所有传递依赖项强制执行依赖项版本。
本节阐明了通常的依赖字段和直接依赖的解析之间的优先级。对于直接依赖的情况，通常的依赖字段优先。在您先声明决议然后执行 yarn add foo@version 的情况下，您希望您的包在那之后使用 foo@version，即使您之前声明了 resolutions: {foo: 'old_version'}。[=14] =]
我正在阅读 yarn resolutions RFC 并停在了这里：
The
devDependencies,optionalDependenciesanddependenciesfields always take precedence over theresolutionsfield: if the user defines explicitly a dependency there, it means that he wants that version, even if it's specified with a non-exact specification. So theresolutionsfield only applies to nested-dependencies. Nevertheless, in case of incompatibility between the specification of a non-nested dependency version and a resolution, a warning is issued.
如果我可以通过通常的依赖项字段强制执行依赖项的版本，我为什么要选择（看似）更复杂的 "resolutions" 字段？
您可以通过通常的依赖项字段强制执行依赖项的版本，仅适用于直接包依赖项，而不是那些依赖项的依赖项。 resolutions 字段需要在整个项目中为所有传递依赖项强制执行依赖项版本。
本节阐明了通常的依赖字段和直接依赖的解析之间的优先级。对于直接依赖的情况，通常的依赖字段优先。在您先声明决议然后执行 yarn add foo@version 的情况下，您希望您的包在那之后使用 foo@version，即使您之前声明了 resolutions: {foo: 'old_version'}。[=14] =]