move browser-only rrdom features to the new vdom package

[Yuyz0112]

Previously, there were two parts of code in the rrdom package:

1. The general virtual DOM implementation.
2. The polyfill code helps build the virtual DOM to run in NodeJS(without browser support).

Mixing these codes in one package cause some problems, the most obvious one is we need to import from rrdom/es/virtual-dom to make sure we will not import NodeJS-related code.

Although it works, it left some tricky config code and is not friendly to bundle tools and monorepo tools.

So in this PR, I move the general implementation to a new package rrdom, and rename the original rrdom to rrdom-nodejs. The dependency relations become:

flowchart TB
    rrdom --> rrweb
    rrdom --> rrdom-nodejs

Loading

[YunFeng0817]

This is a great refactor! My only concern is the name 'vdom', cause there is already a package in the npmjs's repositories. https://www.npmjs.com/package/vdom
I'm not sure whether our package still can be published or not.

[Yuyz0112]

@Mark-Fenng Yes, this is just a proposal, and I can refactor it.

I think there are two strategies:

1. rename vdom to rrdom, and rename rrdom to rrdom-nodejs
2. keep the naming and never publish vdom package to the registry, just use it as an internal package

[Juice10]

The rrdom and rrdom-nodejs proposal "feels" better to me but I don't really have a good rational argument for this argument over the other.

This PR looks great, thanks for taking the time to break this apart! This makes building a lot cleaner, and reduces circular dependencies.

I understand the confusion with BaseRRNode, I'm not sure I totally understand when to use it myself. But it makes sense to keep the imports what they where and not change them

[YunFeng0817]

I also prefer the first strategy because it feels more intuitive.

[Yuyz0112]

@Mark-Fenng @Juice10 I've updated this PR.

[Juice10]

Great stuff @Yuyz0112!

[YunFeng0817]

great work!

[Yuyz0112]

let's merge