refactor: Output ESM files w/ .mjs when appropriate
#950
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: c9a7e90 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
| : pkg['jsnext:main'] || 'x.esm.js', | ||
| : pkg['jsnext:main'] || pkgTypeModule | ||
| ? 'x.esm.js' | ||
| : 'x.esm.mjs', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think .m.js and .esm.js were both poor approximations of .mjs, and we should be able to drop the infix.
| : 'x.esm.mjs', | |
| : 'x.mjs', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Makes sense, though I wonder if that will confuse some.
For users who might not be super familiar with module formats, Microbundle is quite easy to understand given the current names: esm -> x.esm.js, umd -> x.umd.js, etc. esm -> x.mjs might be harder to follow.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's a reasonable thought, yeah. I could go either way on this.
Co-authored-by: Jason Miller <developit@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Jason Miller <developit@users.noreply.github.com>
Per the conversation on Slack, both modern and esm output formats may now create
.mjsfiles when appropriate.