Hi @aleclarson, I wanted to ask you if it was possible to verify this PR, please.
I think it is important to minimize dependencies and using SystemJS worries me a little as I don't have the control I need, moreover in some cases the use of SystemJS only adds an overload.
I also think that the balance between cross-browser support and the amount of code could benefit from this because precisely with a configuration we could remove this overload from the output (if not necessary).
At the moment I am forced to use a version locally with these changes proposed in this PR.

Hope for a review soon, sorry for the disturb, and thanks in advance 😉

Hi @marco-prontera, just wanted to let you know that we've put this PR in the team discussion board. We'll try to get to it soon. Sorry for the long wait!

Hi @bluwy any news? 😃

Sorry we've been busy with the Vite 3 release. Hoping we can finally take a look at this in the next team meeting 😬

This was discussed in the last meeting. However we decided to not go ahead with this as we prefer to maintain the systemjs only version instead. If you'd like to use this feature, you can fork the plugin and publish it separately. Closing this for now.

This was discussed in the last meeting. However we decided to not go ahead with this as we prefer to maintain the systemjs only version instead. If you'd like to use this feature, you can fork the plugin and publish it separately. Closing this for now.

This was discussed in the last meeting. However we decided to not go ahead with this as we prefer to maintain the systemjs only version instead. If you'd like to use this feature, you can fork the plugin and publish it separately. Closing this for now.

I understand, thanks