Caridy Patiño
Caridy Patiño
@joeldenning the question here is how `` can rely on a custom loader vs custom hooks. If what you have in mind is to completely drop the support for ``...
we have discussed this in the past, and we all agreed that we can't support the same level of ambiguity that node/io.js supports today. in other words, this is in...
sorry @johnjbarton, I'm rushing today jejeje. your interpretation is correct. the deal is that the `site` configuration is an imperative call, that means users have the flexibility to compose the...
@guybedford yes. e.g.: ``` js site({ "jquery": "https://cdn.example.com/jquery/v/2.1.1/index.js", "jquery/sizzle": "https://cdn.example.com/sizzle/v/1.2/sizzle.js", "jquery/*": "https://cdn.example.com/jquery/v/2.1.1/plugins/*.min.js", }); ``` it should take precedence since it has an exact match, but that's an open question. we...
@guybedford if the url isn't a normalized url after the first pass on the sites table, it should be processed as if you were doing ``, they should be reflective....
correct
@matthewp, renamed, plus some formalization explained in this issue as part of the clean up, that's all.
@guybedford I want to hear it, let's chat.
In https://github.com/whatwg/loader/pull/65 we have deferred the SitePackage implementation, we plan to come back to it as part of Stage 3: https://github.com/whatwg/loader/blob/master/roadmap.md#stage-3-conveniences Let's keep this issue around in the meantime.
why will that matter? In theory those are internal operations, and the loader can probably rely on the runtime configuration.