fix: allow require statement in exports.

[lucien-perouze]

Hello first contribution on open source project and don't have a clue what's the protocol nor time to read all your docs sorry :/

But here is a really obvious quick fix for a big issue : We cannot require() your library.

As mentioned in this issue that I commented :
#10911

When specifying exports in package.json it overwrites the main attributes.
So currently there is no rule for "requiring" the module.
I simply added a default rule to package.json instead of the import one and it works like a charm.

Thank you for your work, best regards,

Lucien Perouze

[dangreen]

@lucien-perouze Hi.

We cannot require() your library

Chart.js v4 is an ESM-only package, so you can't require it

[lucien-perouze]

Why so ? Is there features that would break ?
I'm developing a component library with Chart.js and I need to build it in common js for compatibility purposes.
It works well with my fix but I haven't tested all your features.

[dangreen]

@lucien-perouze Today many packages have become ESM-only. It is important to push forward ESM adoption.

[LeeLenaleee]

As stated in the docs you need to require the UMD build specifically, that should work fine

https://www.chartjs.org/docs/master/getting-started/integration.html#requirejs

[kurkle]

@lucien-perouze Today many packages have become ESM-only. It is important to push forward ESM adoption.

I don't really understand. I think its important to be ESM-first, but why is it important to not support commonjs?

I think it would require something like that: https://github.com/chartjs/Chart.js/compare/master...kurkle:Chart.js:node-cjs?expand=1

[simonbrunel]

@dangreen Is CommonJS dead / deprecated? I agree with @kurkle, that's a strange decision to actually drop support for it. From who this decision comes from and why? Maybe I'm missing some important points so any links to issues / PR would be appreciated.

Chart.js is used for server-side rendering and is integrated in CJS projects so it's indeed a bad decision IMO to make such cases more complex or impossible. Is it also because of that change that we need to "fix" all plugins? Before going further adapting plugins I maintain, I would love to have more understanding about this breaking change.

[dangreen]

@simonbrunel @kurkle

#10525 (comment)

#10525 (comment)

[kurkle]

I'd be open to revert the seemingly bad decision.

[dangreen]

@kurkle #10984

[kurkle]

#10984