Add comment about bundling deps in r3f/extension
This commit is contained in:
parent
8f1d26536b
commit
cbfc8861b5
1 changed files with 20 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -44,6 +44,26 @@ async function createBundles() {
|
|||
const result = await build(esbuildConfig)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
/**
|
||||
* We were initially externalizing react+fiber+drei+stdlib and having them as peer deps. Once we started to test this setup with different
|
||||
* versions of each, we realized that:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* 1. It can be confusing for npm users to satisfy the peer dep ranges. I (Aria) struggled to get the peer deps right in a sample project.
|
||||
* 2. More importantly, some permutations of these deps ended up not necessarily working together even though they satisfied the peer dep
|
||||
* ranges.
|
||||
* 3. Also, since react 17 and 18 have subtly different behaviors (useEffect, suspend, etc), we thought that us having to support both of
|
||||
* those behaviors in the snapshot editor is probably not that useful to the user. So we thought removing that surface area by bundling
|
||||
* react into the snapshot editor would reduce the chance of running into bugs caused by the differences between react 17 and 18.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* So we made the call to bundle all of these libraries in the `/extension` bundle.
|
||||
*
|
||||
* The downsides we thought about:
|
||||
*
|
||||
* 1. The bundle size of the snapshot editor increases, but since users don't ship the snapshot editor to their end users, we thought this
|
||||
* should be tolerable (let us know if it's not).
|
||||
* 2. Another downside we thought of is that having two versions of react and fiber on the same page may cause issues, but we haven't ran
|
||||
* into any yet, so don't know if those issues couldn't be worked around.
|
||||
*/
|
||||
async function createExtensionBundle() {
|
||||
const pathToEntry = path.join(__dirname, '../src/extension/index.ts')
|
||||
const esbuildConfig: Parameters<typeof build>[0] = {
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue