Add unpkg and jsdelivr fields to package.json

[tmcw]

Immer already has a UMD build, which is great! This PR adds jsdelivr and unpkg fields in package.json pointing to the same place, so jsdelivr.com and unpkg.com respectively can automatically serve the right files, and AMD implementations that depend on one or both of those (like d3-require) can automatically load immer directly or as a dependency.

[aleclarson]

Hey thanks! I wonder why they don't support umd:main?

[aleclarson]

Note: You can always use https://bundle.run/immer instead

[tmcw]

There's a lot of bundle history so I might be missing something, but as far as I can tell, microbundle coined umd:main, and unpkg predates it by quite a while, as does jsdelivr. Surprisingly nobody's asked about umd:main on the unpkg issue tracker, but also notably microbundle switched to recommending the unpkg field. Like the rest of JavaScript modules, it's… chaotic.

Yep, though bundle.run works, it’s a bigger piece of infrastructure to maintain than the NPM CDNs, so it’s often slow or crashed.

[aleclarson]

Cool, thanks for the insight!

[aleclarson]

Maybe umd:main and jsdelivr should be removed since Microbundle recommends (and of course, Unpkg supports) the unpkg field?

[tmcw]

I think getting rid of umd:main should be fine because no consumers use it, but I think jsdelivr should stay because sadly they don't support the unpkg field - see Tips for Module Authors on this page.

[aleclarson]

@jimaek Yo, can you weigh in here? Can we agree on unpkg being the standard?

Q: Why can't jsDelivr et al look for an existing .umd.js to use before loading package.json.

[aleclarson]

Oh, the jsDelivr server isn't open source, so I don't see why we should cater to them.

[aleclarson]

How ubiquitous is jsDelivr?

[aleclarson]

Meh, I've overblown this. I'm just gonna merge. 😂

[aleclarson]

🎉 This PR is included in version 3.1.3 🎉

The release is available on:

• npm package (@latest dist-tag)
• GitHub release

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀