Closed ai closed 2 years ago
@ai sorry for slow response
I think we should keep webpack, because currently, it is necessary for benchmarking in a browsers. Also, we can remove API documentation and replace it with link to original source-map documentation.
And I like the idea of removing comments from published code. If you think it's safe enough, so let's do it.
And as I understand, it should be major release? I'm fine with it. We can release it as 1.0.0 BTW. I thought that it will be useful to try keep in sync versions with original source-map, but seems that it doesn't make any sense.
I think we should keep webpack, because currently, it is necessary for benchmarking in a browsers.
Can we build webpack version just to use in benchmark and do not put file to npm package?
And as I understand, it should be major release
Yeap, let’s do major (1.0 or 0.7).
😍
This change reduces
source-map-js
footprint innode_modules
from 700 KB (!) to 100 KB.Now,
source-map-js
is 77% of installing size of PostCSS 😓.dist/
with webpack pre-build. Use case for pre-build is very limited and can be easily replaced bywebpack
on user’s side. For instance, most of my open source doesn’t have pre-build files.README.md
in npm package byclean-publish
. You will to release this package withnpx clean-publish
instead ofnpm publish
Also https://github.com/7rulnik/source-map-js/pull/6 can be merged to fix now useless
package.json
key,