You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Many libraries that supports many bundlers and type of apps like https://github.com/mui. Not use the exports field.
Yup, that's likely because the exports field is fairly recent, and also adopting it is likely a breaking change.
They use a package.json inside of they components to specify, where is the module, the main, the types, etc. (module resolution)
It would be excellent if you can add a section for this, or I can make contribution with more info about that.
Yeah, this is a common pattern for libraries that don't support package exports.
I could be wrong, but I don't think this is necessarily best practices for "modern" bundling, however. I'm under the impression that it's better to use package exports nowadays.
I am open to seeing if that's not necessarily the case, though.
Many libraries that supports many bundlers and type of apps like @mui. Not use the
exports
field.They use a
package.json
inside of they components to specify, where is the module, the main, the types, etc. (module resolution)It would be excellent if you can add a section for this, or I can make contribution with more info about that.
PD: Thanks for sharing this guide it's excellent.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: