v5 features list

[yusukebe]

Features we aim to implement for the next major version v5.

This list will be updated.

• ESM only [Discussion] make Hono ESM only in next major version #5105 Types exports are incorrect in package.json #3284
• Splitting adapters to separate packages Feature Request: Split adapters into separate packages #4949
• Adopting tsdown
• c.req.query() returns Record<string, string | undefined> ctx.req.query() should return Record<string, string | undefined> #3426
• Consider onError Let app.onError handle non-Error instance #667
• Response validation Response serialization and validation #2439
• Support for * as a valid path parameter #5155
• feat(mount)!: introduce Mount Middleware and obsolete app.mount #5221
• c.req.json() to unknown from any https://github.com/orgs/honojs/discussions/4979
• [PoC] feat: dispatch notFound and onError handlers as internal routes #5229
• Obsolete HonoRequest.routePath()
• c.json returning empty string for undefined values #2343
• Remove getQueryStrings from utils/url.ts (not used)

[BlankParticle]

We should try using sub-issues for this! they look like this rolldown/rolldown#9030, its better than a markdown checklist of issues
https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/using-issues/browsing-sub-issues

Also lets make a v5 branch so we can start making PRs targeting that branch

[mnsrulz]

might as well add api.query method to support QUERY method

[yusukebe]

@mnsrulz

For the QUERY method, we will introduce it in the next minor release v4.13.0.

[BlankParticle]

can we add #5155 as a feature in v5, I just made the issue and I think its a pretty neat thing to have

[Micnubinub]

Can we add output validation please? Some of the ideas in here were pretty good #2439

[yusukebe]

@Micnubinub Adding output validation is great (though I don't know how to implement it now).

[BlankParticle]

@yusukebe thoughts on #5155, i mentioned it here previously

[Micnubinub]

@yusukebe maybe you can play around with elysia and see how you feel about the ergonomics, maybe see where you can improve it?https://elysiajs.com/essential/validation.html#response-per-status

[darcyrush]

@yusukebe Would you consider tightening the types of c.req.json() to unknown from any as per this discussion; https://github.com/orgs/honojs/discussions/4979 ?

[yusukebe]

@darcyrush Yeah! That's a good idea!