Derek Lewis

> Has this been considered? Yes, I believe this has been considered. One of the options proposed was to have a package.json field that would allow users to specify the...

> Where in the process will that happen, and which package.json file will need a new loader config field added? We have not really discussed the feasibility of specifying a...

> If anyone is able to comment on the specifics of a package.json-specified loader, I can figure out if it supports this use-case. Well, it's a rather simple concept if...

> What's the scope of the loader's influence? If a package's entry-point is loaded using the loader, and that package attempts to dynamically or statically `import` a path that the...

> Out of curiosity, which high-profile loaders has the team looked at as part of their design work? It has been very difficult for me to gather information about what...

To start to address the initial question of “tool config transpilation”, it might be good to check out what is being done today — (several months later): ### [Gulp](https://gulpjs.com/docs/en/getting-started/javascript-and-gulpfiles/#transpilation) -...

The `esm` module, a userland loader to polyfill versions of Node.js without native ES Modules, is no longer necessary in v13.2+. This is because most of the ES module implementation...

@jonaskello, this topic is also something I have known would require a design document, so I am glad that you made a good start with this seeing as how we...

Hi @joeldenning, > I am interested in it for the various node loaders that I help maintain at https://github.com/node-loader, such as an import maps loader, babel loader, http loader, postcss...

Yeah, @weswigham has clued us in about the TypeScript filesystem resolution algorithm in the past. Feel free to read up more on that at https://github.com/nodejs/help/issues/2642#issuecomment-616819273. We may need to implement...