Fix extensions for ecmascript types #20
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
According to [RFC4329](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4329) both `application/ecmascript` and `text/ecmascript` are associated with extension `.es` and not `.js`. The [draft RFC](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bfarias-javascript-mjs-01) that adds `.mjs` support does not change those assignments either. Moreover, according to RFC4329, `application/ecmascript` has stricter processing rules, so applications should not be returning that MIME type for Javascript files without opting in to those stricter rules.
|
@halostatue I see you were the one who merged #11 that caused the regression. Do you mind taking a look at this PR as well? Thank you! |
|
Thanks! |
tigefa4u
pushed a commit
to tigefa4u/gitlabhq
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 17, 2019
This fixes a regression in mime-types-data: mime-types/mime-types-data#20
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
According to RFC4329 both
application/ecmascriptandtext/ecmascriptare associated with extension.esand not.js. The draft RFC that adds.mjssupport does not change those assignments either.Moreover, according to RFC4329,
application/ecmascripthas stricter processing rules, so applications should not be returning that MIME type for Javascript files without opting in to those stricter rules.PR #11, however, introduced a regression by adding
.jsand.mjsas extensions forapplication/ecmascriptandtext/ecmascript. This PR fixes that regression.