The built file size would increase slightly by ~4kb with this addition, but would greatly enhance the compatibility. @jrburke do you have any thoughts on this.
I believe the benefits would outweigh the file size adjustment, this would allow for built modules, remote loading, etc.
I do want almond to work well, and not have any surprises beyond the limitations almond was built around. So I continue to plan on supporting almond. If you find users of the boilerplate tripping over those restrictions though, it may make sense to just ship with requirejs.
Maybe an option to specify which one to use? I could imagine some mvc apps benefiting from dynamic loading, but since I have been mostly doing "infrastructure" tools for a bit, I am a bit out of practice.
For myself, I can say I'm behind this. I personally rarely had an app which didn't need to load additionnal external resources (i18n, third party SDKs, etc); and for ~4kb, it never felt like something necessary to skim this down considering the restriction.
Although I can see the point for specific high traffic/high performance website, I think in most case require.js is all fine.
@jrburke i'm thinking I could still bundle almond for those who need it, but default to requirejs for new installs.
Commented out Almond. Defaults to require.js.
This should be left to the developer to decide. Going to keep almond for now, if you need remote loading we'll document changing it.
Fair enough. Closing.
Yea, I figure this could even just be a scaffolding step.