2.1.0

[wesleytodd]

What's Changed

• cleanup: remove unnecessary devDependency readable-stream by @Phillip9587 in cleanup: remove unnecessary devDependency readable-stream #67
• fix: remove unpipe package and use native unpipe method by @Phillip9587 in fix: remove unpipe package and use native unpipe method #66
• cleanup: remove unnecessary devDependency safe-buffer by @Phillip9587 in cleanup: remove unnecessary devDependency safe-buffer #68
• refactor: remove ServerResponse.headersSent support check by @Phillip9587 in refactor: remove ServerResponse.headersSent support check #77
• cleanup: remove setImmediate support check by @Phillip9587 in cleanup: remove setImmediate support check #73
• chore: update test dependencies by @Phillip9587 in chore: update test dependencies #76
• chore: update HISTORY.md for v1.3.1 and v1.3.0 releases by @Phillip9587 in chore: update HISTORY.md for v1.3.1 and v1.3.0 releases #71
• fix(deps): encodeurl@^2.0.0 by @Phillip9587 in fix(deps): encodeurl@^2.0.0 #72
• refactor: remove http2 support check from tests by @Phillip9587 in refactor: remove http2 support check from tests #69
• refactor: use object spread to copy error headers by @Phillip9587 in refactor: use object spread to copy error headers #79
• chore(deps): update debug to ^4.4.0 by @Phillip9587 in chore(deps): update debug to ^4.4.0 #78
• refactor: use replaceAll instead of replace with a regex by @Phillip9587 in refactor: use replaceAll instead of replace with a regex #80
• refactor: replace setHeaders function with optimized inline header setting by @Phillip9587 in refactor: replace setHeaders function with optimized inline header setting #74
• ci: updated github actions ci workflow by @Phillip9587 in ci: updated github actions ci workflow #70

New Contributors

• @Phillip9587 made their first contribution in cleanup: remove unnecessary devDependency readable-stream #67

Full Changelog: v2.0.0...v2.1.0

[Phillip9587]

@wesleytodd What about #59? The other packages updated the engines field in the minor version should we include it?

[wesleytodd]

I know they did, and I think we reached a consensus that they shouldn't have. expressjs/discussions#286 (comment)

Let me know if you read that differently.

[Phillip9587]

But you just included a engines field update in the router release so i think it would make sense to include it in this minor too:

• https://github.com/pillarjs/router/releases/tag/v2.1.0
• fix engines field for 2.0.0 router#131

[Phillip9587]

I'm good with either approach—just happy to see this release go out and clean up some legacy code along the way!

[wesleytodd]

But you just included a engines field update in the router release

Ah, I didn't catch that as I was reading through that release PR. Too much trust in the approvals and too much time since I last looked at the content. My bad.

The agreement was for sure those shouldn't have landed, but now that I published the only fix would be a fast follow patch to remove it again. @ctcpip thoughts on that? Should we back that out in a fast patch?

Either way I don't think repeating the mistake here is a good idea. I would rather back out that PR that landed than release this also with the breaking engines field change.