Hello! On Mon, May 23, 2022 at 11:32:08AM +0200, Mathias Bynens via nginx-devel wrote:
> Thank you, Maxim. Is there anything else I can do to help move this > along? The change is rather small and clearly follows the latest RFC, > so I would expect it to be uncontroversial. On the other hand, the RFC itself is rather controversial, as it changes preferred MIME type for javascript for no apparent reason, and it adds the "mjs" extension, which is known to be mostly used in NodeJS-specific environments and was originally introduced with quite questionable claim that "on the web file extensions doesn't matter". I don't think we are in position to add the mjs extension, it does not seem to qualify as something commonly used on the web now. The ticket referenced in the previous message can be used to track the request. As for the MIME type change from "application/javascript" to "text/javascript", this is something we'll consider as the outcome of the change suggested by the RFC becomes more clear. For now, it looks like this might need more compatibility shims (such as adding both "text/javascript" and "application/javascript" to the default list of types handled by the charset module) and more changes (such as change of the MIME type used by autoindex with JSONP format). Hope this helps. -- Maxim Dounin http://mdounin.ru/ _______________________________________________ nginx-devel mailing list -- nginx-devel@nginx.org To unsubscribe send an email to nginx-devel-le...@nginx.org
