Remove @types/* from dependencies

[gmukul01]

Prerequisites

• I am using the correct version of React-Bootstrap for my version of Bootstrap
• I have searched for duplicate or closed issues
• I have read the contributing guidelines

Describe the bug

@types/* being added in dependencies instead of devDependencies.

Expected behavior

@types/* should be added in devDependencies

To Reproduce

No response

Reproducible Example

There are no steps to reproduce it.

Screenshots

No response

What operating system(s) are you seeing the problem on?

No response

What browser(s) are you seeing the problem on?

No response

What version of React-Bootstrap are you using?

2.2.2

What version of Bootstrap are you using?

5.1.3

Additional context

No response

[jquense]

Types are supposed to be in dependencies because they need to be installed when some one installs the package. Other wise typescript will not be able to correctly typecheck when you use react-bootstap

[gmukul01]

@jquense At least we can move it to peerDependency. Keeping it in dependency is failing in our project because it is installing latest version on react types(v18) which is not compatible as of now in our project.

[kyletsang]

The react types should've been deduped if you already have it in declared in your project package.json? It shouldn't have installed a copy of the react 18 types.

Can you try this command in your project? npm ls @types/react

[gmukul01]

@kyletsang @jquense This is the result of npm ls @types/react. I have also fixed the version of @types/react to 17, but still the latest version of @types/react is getting installed.

The above dependency is coming from react-bootstrap

[golota60]

related: facebook/react#24304 (comment)

Declaring @types/react as an (optional) peer dependency is the correct solution.

here's how MUI does it cc @kyletsang

[kyletsang]

Optional peer deps is the correct approach. I think we've tried adding this in the past but most people were still on versions of npm that doesn't support this. It's been long enough now, so I've opened #6303 to properly clean this up.