-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30k
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.
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
stabilize packages features #35742
stabilize packages features #35742
Conversation
Review requested:
|
doc/api/packages.md
Outdated
|
||
When a package has an [`"exports"`][] field, this will take precedence over the | ||
`"main"` field when importing the package by name. | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think @guybedford deliberately wanted this below "exports"
because we want people to be preferring "exports"
over "main"
.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the ordering is changed in #35741
I can update it there
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not tied to the ordering, it just a suggestion previously since there was no explicit ordering (it not being alphabetical).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe the list on L825 can have its ordering stated ("In order of precedence, the possible entries are:") while the headers can be in alphabetical order?
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
lgtm
This probably shouldn't land before the runtime deprecation in #35747 because otherwise that runtime deprecation is semver-major? |
@Trott the folder pathing stuff is currently no longer documented and unaffected by this change |
These features are being used in production and are ready to be considered stable. Refs: nodejs/modules#564
fdfbd1d
to
c9a55e3
Compare
@nodejs/modules I would like to land this. If there are no objections within 24 hours I will land it tomorrow. @Trott I removed your blocked label as I don't believe the feature you pointed out is affected by this change. Please let me know if you think I'm mistaken |
Landed in acdfc16 |
These features are being used in production and are ready to be considered stable. Refs: nodejs/modules#564 PR-URL: #35742 Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
These features are being used in production and are ready to be considered stable. Refs: nodejs/modules#564 PR-URL: #35742 Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
These features are being used in production and are ready to be considered stable. Refs: nodejs/modules#564 PR-URL: #35742 Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
These features are being used in production and are ready to be considered stable. Refs: nodejs/modules#564 PR-URL: #35742 Reviewed-By: Guy Bedford <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ujjwal Sharma <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Franziska Hinkelmann <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Geoffrey Booth <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
These features are being used in production and are ready to be
considered stable.
Refs: nodejs/modules#564
Depends on #35741
/cc @nodejs/modules