-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
Conversation
at this point can we just pr upstream? |
What is the solution for extensionless files?
…On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 8:45 PM Gus Caplan ***@***.***> wrote:
at this point can we just pr upstream?
—
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#66 (comment)>,
or mute the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV9RWpo2tn0c3uAty_Do7eTdH7RlEks5vcqg_gaJpZM4cW4pj>
.
|
Also, I think it is reasonable to work off the fork for changes to the
roadmap... So we don't cause upstream noise when we don't have consensus on
larger changes...thoughts?
…On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 9:03 PM Myles Borins ***@***.***> wrote:
What is the solution for extensionless files?
On Mon, Apr 1, 2019, 8:45 PM Gus Caplan ***@***.***> wrote:
> at this point can we just pr upstream?
>
> —
> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
> Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
> <#66 (comment)>,
> or mute the thread
> <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV9RWpo2tn0c3uAty_Do7eTdH7RlEks5vcqg_gaJpZM4cW4pj>
> .
>
|
It’s unchanged. As I wrote in nodejs/modules#300 (comment), I’m assuming most people wouldn’t run their extensionless file via So in order to run just |
👍 We should probably discuss this in the meeting, if people don’t mind. I’m assuming that if this PR gets consensus from our group, I or Myles can open it as a PR upstream. It can’t hurt to get consensus among us first; I feel like our upstream PRs will get accepted more easily if we resolve all our internal disagreements privately first. |
b1da781
to
391215a
Compare
391215a
to
339ae10
Compare
I only hope that no one gets confused thinking that this affects |
Approved per consensus in 2019-04-10 meeting. |
@MylesBorins should I merge this into |
Just open a pr upstream
… On Apr 10, 2019, at 9:58 PM, Geoffrey Booth ***@***.***> wrote:
@MylesBorins <https://github.com/MylesBorins> should I merge this into modules-lkgr or open this as a PR against upstream?
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#66 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecVzMy_da86f6jUiBdMuOS95Zoem92ks5vfkKCgaJpZM4cW4pj>.
|
Opened as nodejs/node#27184. |
nodejs/node#27184 was merged. |
Per nodejs/modules#300 (comment), this PR replaces
--entry-type
with--input-type
, a flag just like--entry-type
but only for--eval
,--print
andSTDIN
.This way we still provide a way to use ESM in those non-file inputs, but we’re removing the footgun that is
--entry-type
in its current form. To use ESM in files, the files need to end in.mjs
or be in a"type": "module"
package scope.Tests and docs updated.