feat: nuxt-i18n-micro module integration

[harlan-zw]

🔗 Linked issue

s00d/nuxt-i18n-micro#11

❓ Type of change

• 📖 Documentation (updates to the documentation or readme)
• 🐞 Bug fix (a non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
• 👌 Enhancement (improving an existing functionality)
• ✨ New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality)
• 🧹 Chore (updates to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries)
• ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

📚 Description

As the i18n config has an identical signature we can support the https://github.com/s00d/nuxt-i18n-micro module out of the box without any extra effort 🤞

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
sitemap-edge-demo	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Sep 20, 2024 7:29am

[genu]

@harlan-zw is a similar change required here?

https://github.com/harlan-zw/nuxt-seo/blob/bc1dc0b4263adcf90d8df372c4b4eb21a937ba6e/src/module.ts#L143C5-L146C6

[harlan-zw]

Thanks for the review @genu, I'm only considering sitemap integration with this module at the moment.

[genu]

I see, but wouldn't it cause issue when using the main seo module?

For instance, it will polyfill the i18n composable when it should not, since its provided by nuxt-i18n-micro.

Nuxt throws errors about duplicate composables when using together.

[harlan-zw]

Hmm good point but it's a warning that is thrown so not a big deal, the pollyfills should be registered with low priority though.

Having to support nuxt-i18n-micro in all SEO modules is not something I have capacity for at the moment so if this is a blocker then we may consider closing this PR.

[genu]

Hmm, I can test a little bit more on my end, as I noticed the polyfill is indeed used instead of the i18n-micro composable.

Maybe the order in the modules array affects this? 🤔