Revert "fix #1874: node defaults to --packages=external"#3820
Merged
Conversation
This reverts commit 196dcad.
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
This PR reverts the recent change in version 0.22.0 that made
--packages=externalthe default behavior with--platform=node. The default is now back to--packages=bundle.I've just been made aware that Amazon doesn't pin their dependencies in their "AWS CDK" product, which means that whenever esbuild publishes a new release, many people (potentially everyone?) using their SDK around the world instantly starts using it without Amazon checking that it works first. This change in version 0.22.0 happened to break their SDK. I'm amazed that things haven't broken before this point. This revert attempts to avoid these problems for Amazon's customers. Hopefully Amazon will pin their dependencies in the future.
In addition, this is probably a sign that esbuild is used widely enough that it now needs to switch to a more complicated release model. I may have esbuild use a beta channel model for further development.
Closes #3819