refactor(vue): only ship es modules #26054
Merged
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Re-landing #26043 because I forgot to set the commit message.
Pull request checklist
Please check if your PR fulfills the following requirements:
ionic-docs
repo, in a separate PR. See the contributing guide for details.npm run build
) was run locally and any changes were pushednpm run lint
) has passed locally and any fixes were made for failuresPull request type
Please check the type of change your PR introduces:
What is the current behavior?
Issue URL: resolves #25104
Prior to the Custom Elements Bundle switch, Ionic Core shipped as CommonJS. Ionic Vue shipped CommonJS and ES Module entrypoints that consumed Ionic Core.
With the switch to Custom Element Bundle, Ionic Vue only consumed the ES Module version of Ionic Core. As a result, the CommonJS entry point was no longer needed. This caused issues with Vitest where tests would not run (see linked issue).
What is the new behavior?
Note: This likely will not cause issues with developer applications. If their environment did not support ES Modules, then they would already have been running into issues due to Ionic Core being ES Modules. However, I do think this should be treated as a breaking change just to be safe.
Does this introduce a breaking change?
Other information