Skip to content

docs(server): include plugin setup in source startup #692

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
faizan-oai wants to merge 1 commit into from
+2 −0
Closed

docs(server): include plugin setup in source startup #692

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions sdk/typescript/README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -953,6 +953,8 @@ From `sdk/typescript`, install dependencies, build, and start:

```bash
pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
npm ci --prefix ../../plugins/codex-security/mcp-app --no-audit --no-fund

@mldangelo-oai mldangelo-oai Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

npm or pnpm?

@faizan-oai faizan-oai Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@codex should this be pnpm or npm?

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

npm is correct for that line.

The commands intentionally use two package managers because they target two separate packages:

So the current documentation should remain:

pnpm install --frozen-lockfile
npm ci --prefix ../../plugins/codex-security/mcp-app --no-audit --no-fund

No repository change was necessary, so I did not create a commit or follow-up PR.

Checks

  • ✅ find plugins/codex-security/mcp-app -maxdepth 2 \( -name package.json -o -name 'package-lock.json' -o -name 'pnpm-lock.yaml' \) -print
  • ✅ node -e "for (const p of ['sdk/typescript/package.json','plugins/codex-security/mcp-app/package.json']) {const j=require('./'+p); console.log(p, {packageManager:j.packageManager, scripts:j.scripts})}"
  • ✅ git status --short --branch (working tree clean)

View task →

@faizan-oai faizan-oai Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@codex what if the user only uses pnpm and not npm though? How does it make sense to mix package managers?

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Summary

  • Clarified that the source build intentionally requires both package managers because the SDK is locked with pnpm, while the nested MCP app has its own npm lockfile. This avoids implying that the npm command is interchangeable with pnpm. sdk/typescript/README.mdL951-L954
  • Preserved the reproducible installation commands for both packages and the existing build/start sequence. sdk/typescript/README.mdL956-L961
  • Committed the change as 282b713 (docs: clarify source build package managers) and prepared a follow-up PR titled “docs: clarify source build package managers.”

Testing

  • ✅ pnpm exec prettier --check README.md
  • ✅ git diff --check
  • ✅ git status --short --branch (clean working tree after commit)

View task →

pnpm run build:plugin
pnpm run build
pnpm run start:server
```
Expand Down
Loading