refactor(package): change distribution to support main, module, es201… #2804
Conversation
|
We do have scoped package https://www.npmjs.com/package/@reactivex/rxjs for shipping all packges at once, while it currently doesn't have native ES module packages yet. (We did once and stopped, will do again with refined codes) I don't think we'll going to change pkg publishing in |
Generated by 🚫 dangerJS |
-+24.1KB-red.svg?style=flat-square){kind=icon}
-+2.7KB-red.svg?style=flat-square){kind=icon}
|
@kwonoj So the point on this PR is to distribute different formats, while keeping support for deep imports. This way tools like Webpack will pick up the ESM files and will produce significantly smaller application bundles. CJS format is great for Node obviously, but Webpack and Rollup have a hard time optimizing it, therefore this format will allow both to co-exist. I probably should have given a bit more background. I've been working with @benlesh to come up with some way to distribute Rx where we don't break existing applications (deep imports), but also supports optimizations through ESM format. This seems to be the solution that works. |
|
thx for explanation. I'll leave this to @benlesh for primary review and will try to have some more context in core metings. |
jasonaden
force-pushed
the
publish_esm
branch
3 times, most recently
from
b2ec014
to
a383b56
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this seems correct to me, but I'll let Ben be the final judge since he's much more familiar with the codebase.
was this the package that I tested locally against the aio result of this build change? if not, we should probably test things on aio or similar before releasing it.
package.json
Outdated
| "build_closure_core": "Minify Global core build using closure compiler", | ||
| "build_global": "Build Global package, then minify build", | ||
| "build_perf": "Build CJS & Global build, run macro performance test", | ||
| "build_test": "Build CJS package & test spec, execute mocha test runner", | ||
| "build_cover": "Run lint to current code, build CJS & test spec, execute test coverage", | ||
| "build_docs": "Build ES6 & global package, create documentation using it", | ||
| "build_docs": "Build ESM15 & global package, create documentation using it", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we just use "2015" instead of "15" throughout?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@benlesh We switched to esm2015 on the Angular project. Would you like to use the same?
…5 keys in package.json
…w npm published dir
jasonaden
force-pushed
the
publish_esm
branch
from
a383b56
to
6641a8f
Compare
|
@kwonoj I've worked with @jasonaden to try to get this PR right. The outcome is the best we can hope for with current technology stacks/build systems, I think. People should experience some decent code size reductions if they're using Rollup or Webpack properly with this new way of distributing the code. Merging this (despite the dangerjs complaints) ahead of the 5.5 release. |
|
@benlesh yeah I'm fine, 👍 |
|
This thread has been automatically locked since there has not been any recent activity after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs. |
…5 keys in package.json
The structure created by the
build_allin this PR is different from the current one. There's now directories by language/package format. Everything gets built intodistas it already did, but then instead of publishing thecjsfolder, we will now publish thepackagefolder.In here you will find folders for
cjs,esm5, andesm15. TheesmXfolders representECMAScript Modulesand the language level (es5ores2015).cjsis exactly as it used to be (CommonJSformat ines5language level).There is also a
globalfolder (same as before) holding theUMDbundles. And asrcdirectory with the TypeScript sources.In order to support deep imports in all language levels, every file in the package has it's own
package.jsonfile that's dynamically generated in the.make-packages.jsfile.