@MrJmpl3 Thank you for submitting this PR! I see this is your first time submitting to DefinitelyTyped 👋 — I'm the local bot who will help you through the process of getting things through.

This is a live comment which I will keep updated.

This PR doesn't modify any tests, so it's hard to know what's being fixed, and your changes might regress in the future. Have you considered adding tests to cover the change you're making? Including tests allows this PR to be merged by yourself and the owners of this module. This can potentially save days of time for you.

1 package in this PR

• react on npm, on unpkg

Code Reviews

Because this is a widely-used package, a DT maintainer will need to review it before it can be merged.

Status

• ✅ No merge conflicts
• ✅ Continuous integration tests have passed
• ❌ Only a DT maintainer can approve changes without tests

Once every item on this list is checked, I'll ask you for permission to merge and publish the changes.

{
  "type": "info",
  "now": "-",
  "pr_number": 48420,
  "author": "MrJmpl3",
  "owners": [
    "johnnyreilly",
    "bbenezech",
    "pzavolinsky",
    "digiguru",
    "ericanderson",
    "DovydasNavickas",
    "theruther4d",
    "guilhermehubner",
    "ferdaber",
    "jrakotoharisoa",
    "pascaloliv",
    "hotell",
    "franklixuefei",
    "Jessidhia",
    "saranshkataria",
    "lukyth",
    "eps1lon",
    "zieka",
    "dancerphil",
    "dimitropoulos",
    "disjukr",
    "vhfmag",
    "hellatan"
  ],
  "dangerLevel": "ScopedAndUntested",
  "headCommitAbbrOid": "1e6acbe",
  "headCommitOid": "1e6acbea5b5c559a3b710f043e0ef30be0adc638",
  "mergeIsRequested": false,
  "stalenessInDays": 0,
  "lastPushDate": "2020-10-02T02:57:58.000Z",
  "lastCommentDate": "2020-10-02T09:31:47.000Z",
  "maintainerBlessed": false,
  "reviewLink": "https://github.com/DefinitelyTyped/DefinitelyTyped/pull/48420/files",
  "hasMergeConflict": false,
  "authorIsOwner": false,
  "isFirstContribution": true,
  "popularityLevel": "Critical",
  "newPackages": [],
  "packages": [
    "react"
  ],
  "files": [
    {
      "path": "types/react/index.d.ts",
      "kind": "definition",
      "package": "react"
    }
  ],
  "hasDismissedReview": false,
  "ciResult": "pass",
  "lastReviewDate": "2020-10-02T07:40:08.000Z",
  "reviewersWithStaleReviews": [],
  "approvalFlags": 0,
  "isChangesRequested": true
}

🔔 @johnnyreilly @bbenezech @pzavolinsky @digiguru @ericanderson @DovydasNavickas @theruther4d @guilhermehubner @ferdaber @jrakotoharisoa @pascaloliv @Hotell @franklixuefei @Jessidhia @saranshkataria @lukyth @eps1lon @zieka @dancerphil @dimitropoulos @disjukr @vhfmag @hellatan — please review this PR in the next few days. Be sure to explicitly select Approve or Request Changes in the GitHub UI so I know what's going on.

@MrJmpl3 The CI build failed! Please review the logs for more information.

Once you've pushed the fixes, the build will automatically re-run. Thanks!

👋 Hi there! I’ve run some quick measurements against master and your PR. These metrics should help the humans reviewing this PR gauge whether it might negatively affect compile times or editor responsiveness for users who install these typings.

Let’s review the numbers, shall we?

It looks like nothing changed too much. I won’t post performance data again unless it gets worse.

@MrJmpl3 One or more reviewers has requested changes. Please address their comments. I'll be back once they sign off or you've pushed new commits or comments. If you disagree with the reviewer's comments, you can "dismiss" the review using GitHub's review UI. Thank you!

We plan to remove implicit children in a future major React release since they are problematic: #33006

Oh, the next version is coming soon? If the answer is not, Can be this PR a temporal solution?

Oh, the next version is coming soon? If the answer is not, Can be this PR a temporal solution?

We want to remove implicit children. This would be a step in the wrong direction i.e. would lead to more breaking changes in the future. Implicit children was a mistake which we don't want to repeat.

Oh, the next version is coming soon? If the answer is not, Can be this PR a temporal solution?

We want to remove implicit children. This would be a step in the wrong direction i.e. would lead to more breaking changes in the future. Implicit children was a mistake which we don't want to repeat.

Ok, I close the PR.