Review requested:

• @nodejs/actions

Is there a reason to refactor this ESM?

@aduh95 Thanks for the review.

I see the newly added file on tools directory is all ESM module, so I think we could also refactor other commonjs format file to esm module format to make:

1. all tools js file is more consistent: they are all esm module
2. shifting towards ESM which is the official standard.

FYI ESM means 'ECMAScript module', so "esm module" is redundant. I'd suggest using refactor … to ESM or refactor … to ESM syntax instead.

Maybe instead of rl.line, we should use for await(const line of rl), using to our advantage top-level await to improve the script readability would be a very good argument for switching to ESM.

FYI ESM means 'ECMAScript module', so "esm module" is redundant. I'd suggest using refactor … to ESM or refactor … to ESM syntax instead.

Maybe instead of rl.line, we should use for await(const line of rl), using to our advantage top-level await to improve the script readability would be a very good argument for switching to ESM.

Good suggestion. I have refactored rl.on('line' to for await(const line of rl). please take another look. the pr title is also changed to refactor … to ESM

Landed in 5cb2579