Custom seroval plugins

[birkskyum]

For streaming ssr in tanstack start, I've found we need to allow passing in the custom serval plugins that are used with tanstack router. Otherwise there's a mismatch

[lxsmnsyc]

We need to overhaul the entirety of the serialization API. seroval is currently being used separately by Solid and SolidStart, which brings two issues (version parity and plugin parity). We want dom-expressions to expose a serialization API so that SolidStart doesn't have to independently use seroval on its own and while also keeping the plugin capability the same.

[birkskyum]

That sounds like a good idea. It also sounds like a breaking change - where this PR makes things work for now in a non-breaking way. I'd prefer if we can land this first, to remove any urgency, and then make a larger refactor later. @ryansolid would it be okay with you to do it in that order?

[ryansolid]

I'm ok with that. It is just an added API so it won't break anything else.

@lxsmnsyc How should this work for something like TanstackStart? I get that SolidStart wants to share the serializer obviously, but it is an interesting question should others as well.

[lxsmnsyc]

@ryansolid well Tanstack will still suffer from the duped seroval since they use seroval independently.

[birkskyum]

Right, this pr isn't about performance, but rather adding flexibility to make some errors go away, so that we can move tanstack start forward. If it opens the door to a shared serializer afterwards, that would be cool, but it's not a requirement for a first version of start.

[birkskyum]

since you both have expressed to be ok with this non-breaking tweak, then I'd love to land it, so that we can proceed building out the ssr story for start.

[ryansolid]

So we are ok with this going out with a patch release of Solid.. 1.9.10 effectively.. that's ok?

[birkskyum]

Yes, that would be great

[birkskyum]

added unit tests

[ryansolid]

Thanks