Add initial .browserslistrc file

[XhmikosR]

This is a very basic patch, mostly opened for discussion.

To visualize what's supported with this patch please check: https://browsersl.ist/?q=%3E%3D+0.2%25%2C+last+2+major+versions%2C+not+dead%2C+Android+%3E%3D+6%2C+Chrome+%3E%3D+45%2C+Edge+%3E%3D+12%2C+Explorer+%3E%3D+10%2C+Firefox+%3E%3D+38%2C+iOS+%3E%3D+9%2C+Safari+%3E%3D+9

and this is with the defaults: https://browsersl.ist/?q=defaults

Notes:

• for Firefox we should probably use Firefox ESR
• for Chrome, I'm not sure what the minimum version should be
• for iOS/Safari I'm not sure either

Refs #2464

[XhmikosR]

Alright, I changed the patch to be defaults + IE >= 10, see https://browsersl.ist/?q=defaults%2C+Explorer+%3E%3D+10

This should be the safest approach since without a .browserslistrc file the defaults are used.

[XhmikosR]

Can we get a review about this? The solution I went with is as close as it gets to the current master.

IE9 does not work due to requestAnimationFrame, although the content is fine. Maybe I should add IE9 too?

This is the diff with IE9 added vs the current patch (which is defaults + IE>=10): https://gist.github.com/XhmikosR/0ffdac274b042e3e89f2c8c45d0943dd/revisions

[XhmikosR]

BTW if we decide to sort of support IE9, we should tweak the scroll to top script to not use requestAnimationFrame if it's not available. Everything else works AFAICT.

[Trott]

/ping @nodejs/website

[lpinca]

I think this is fine and can be revisited later if it turns out to be too restrictive.

[nschonni]

Is this used by any other tools besides the .use(autoprefixer()) line?

[XhmikosR]

Currently no AFAICT, but it can be used by other tools.

[XhmikosR]

So, how about IE 9?

[nschonni]

Not sure if it matters much if this setup will be eventually replaced with https://github.com/nodejs/nodejs.dev/. Whatever browsers it's working with today is probably OK

[XhmikosR]

Well, IE9 isn't currently specified in master. But apart from the JS error due to requestAnimationFrame, which we could work around, the display is good enough on IE9 AFAICT.

[MylesBorins]

@XhmikosR I think we can move forward with this as is right now and in a follow up PR get a solution to fix IE9 and update the support table. Thoughts?

[MylesBorins]

LGTM

[XhmikosR]

SGTM. I'll leave #2464 open for discussion