bundles it for the browser #113
Conversation
srashid5
force-pushed
the
feature-dist
branch
from
33b362a
to
5f70f27
Compare
package.json
Outdated
| "posttest": "npm run lint && npm run test-browser", | ||
| "prepublish": "npm run update", | ||
| "test": "nyc mocha -R dot -r env-test", | ||
| "test-browser": "testling", | ||
| "test-watch": "mocha -R dot -r env-test --watch", | ||
| "update": "node ./bin/update.js", | ||
| "version": "npm run generate-changelog && git add CHANGELOG.md" | ||
| "version": "npm run generate-changelog && git add CHANGELOG.md", | ||
| "build": "browserify index.js --s tldjs > tld.js", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it also run npm run update to fetch the latest version of publicsuffix list before bundling?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yea running npm run update before bundling makes total sense, thanks for pointing out
what do you think about bundling in a postinstall script? i feel that can be omitted
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe we should omit it from postinstall? I feel like keeping commands simple and predictable is a good thing, let's not do too much at once.
|
thanks @remusao, |
|
It happened before, and it seems to only fail for |
|
Hm, I'm not sure to understand the goal of this pull request, considering the code can already by bundled in any project using browserify/npm. Also, is there a specific lifecycle moment when |
|
hey @oncletom, I've been using this package for one of the projects i'm working on and I ran into this situation where I needed a bundled JS file on client-side as well, but I had to bundle it myself as you mentioned, also I saw others wanting something similar. So I just thought it would be more consistent if the package had bundled JS files as well. I originally thought that bundling should happen post installation, but changed it later. Feel free to close this PR if you think otherwise. |
|
Let's go ahead. It might be of the interest of cdnjs/cdnjs#8943 :-) |
this adds bundling for the browser
see #37, #89