Don't pull in all of core-js with core (#1601) #2049
Closed
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
epicfaace
reviewed
Sep 15, 2020
|
Looks like removing core-js from the lib build here might patch up #1464 (comment) as well? |
|
i would like to see this get merged. this would solve issues with webpack 5 that i'm seeing due to the babel/runtime-corejs2 package being included. |
That seems ok, we can merge this and then release a v3. |
|
@wegry , what happened? Do we no longer want this PR? |
|
@epicfaace I think I accidentally force pushed to this branch trying to get Netlify to build in #2196, and GitHub marked this as closed. Let me see if I can't patch it back up. |
|
Looks like GitHub won't allow me to reopen the PR on with this branch. I'll spin up a new PR that links to this one. |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Reasons for making this change
Two versions of core-js currently exist in my app because @rjsf/core pulls in @babel/runtime currently. There are two direct imports of core-js that I've opted to pull in pure imports for.
For the rationale of why library code shouldn't include polyfills, this comment
w3ctag/polyfills#6 (comment) explains my rationale. This is a breaking change though, if downstream folks were depending on
@babel/runtimebeing around.If this is related to existing tickets, include links to them as well. #1601
Checklist