The reason node wants .mjs is not a new problem about diff semantics and the meaning of .js. It's about solving a problem Node has.
3/3: As you know, many of us concerned about .mjs are open to conversation and compromise. But we're not in the room.
-
-
As stated before CTC meeting are open, even if you dont vote (like me)
-
My fear is .mjs leads to another fork. I don't think the alternative 'in defense of js' does. Maybe community vote is the answer here.
-
I think informing the community goes pretty well. No one likes the conclusion, but it makes sense. Have to avoid knee jerk votes.
-
.mjs doesn't mean "use module" or a package.json approach can't be added after. Core just doesn't plan for many ways to do things first iter
-
Each way you add to do it adds overall burden and division
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.