fix: use export in package.json to reference ESM #232
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Thank you, here's hoping this gets merged quickly! |
|
Hate to be the one doing the "me too" comment, much less to be the annoying one "@-ing people" but the project seems parked and this fix so easy, sorry @MeltingMosaic, @Xapphire13 Bun just launched T.T |
|
Commenting for visibility. Please merge! |
|
Please merge! :) |
|
Please merge! |
|
Please merge ! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
The
modulefield ofpackage.jsonhas never been officially supported by Node.js (see Stackoverflow).To correctly reference the ESM version, Node.js recommends using the
exportfield in thepackage.json(refer to Node.js ESM documentation).With this change, we also ensure compatibility with bun.