@effectionx/process specifies an engine field. It was intended to be primarily used internally in the monorepo, but that also leaks into downstream deps. We should be able to remove it from packages that don't actually have that requirement when published.
$ npm i
npm warn EBADENGINE Unsupported engine {
npm warn EBADENGINE package: '@effectionx/process@0.7.2',
npm warn EBADENGINE required: { node: '>= 22' },
npm warn EBADENGINE current: { node: 'v20.20.0', npm: '11.10.0' }
npm warn EBADENGINE }
npm warn EBADENGINE Unsupported engine {
npm warn EBADENGINE package: '@effectionx/node@0.2.1',
npm warn EBADENGINE required: { node: '>= 22' },
npm warn EBADENGINE current: { node: 'v20.20.0', npm: '11.10.0' }
npm warn EBADENGINE }
@effectionx/processspecifies anenginefield. It was intended to be primarily used internally in the monorepo, but that also leaks into downstream deps. We should be able to remove it from packages that don't actually have that requirement when published.$ npm i npm warn EBADENGINE Unsupported engine { npm warn EBADENGINE package: '@effectionx/process@0.7.2', npm warn EBADENGINE required: { node: '>= 22' }, npm warn EBADENGINE current: { node: 'v20.20.0', npm: '11.10.0' } npm warn EBADENGINE } npm warn EBADENGINE Unsupported engine { npm warn EBADENGINE package: '@effectionx/node@0.2.1', npm warn EBADENGINE required: { node: '>= 22' }, npm warn EBADENGINE current: { node: 'v20.20.0', npm: '11.10.0' } npm warn EBADENGINE }