Prepare @glimmer/component for being published and remove @glimmer/env, using export conditions for dev and prod

[NullVoxPopuli]

@glimmer/components build was wrong.

now is fixed (using the same style of build ember-source uses).

Solves this error:

Error: broken "workspace:" reference to @glimmer/env in @glimmer/component
 at publishedInterPackageDeps (file:///opt/hostedtoolcache/node/24.18.0/x64/lib/node_modules/release-plan/dist/interdep.js:42:35)

#21555

You could argue that this is a release-plan bug, sure.

But, no one should be using @glimmer/env anymore anyway.

[github-actions]

📊 Size report

Tarball size — 1.2 MB → 1.2 MB

dist/dev   No changes

File	Before (Size / Brotli)	After (Size / Brotli)
Total (Includes all files)	2 MB / 489.8 kB	2 MB / 489.8 kB

---

dist/prod   No changes

File	Before (Size / Brotli)	After (Size / Brotli)
Total (Includes all files)	1.9 MB / 447.2 kB	1.9 MB / 447.2 kB

---

smoke-tests/v2-app-template/dist   No changes

File	Before (Size / Brotli)	After (Size / Brotli)
Total (Includes all files)	340.6 kB / 94.8 kB	340.6 kB / 94.8 kB

---

smoke-tests/v2-app-hello-world-template/dist   No changes

File	Before (Size / Brotli)	After (Size / Brotli)
Total (Includes all files)	132.4 kB / 37 kB	132.4 kB / 37 kB

_{🤖 This report was automatically generated by wyvox/pkg-size}

[kategengler]

How did we publish 4 months ago, then?

[NullVoxPopuli]

Locally, probably something custom

[mansona]

You could argue that this is a release-plan bug, sure.

if workspace links were still in the publish that's a pnpm bug not a release-plan bug, are we sure that we are deploying using pnpm publish instead of npm publish?

If this is trying to solve an urgent release problem we should get on a call pronto but I don't think a big change like this should happen without serious discussion just to solve a deployment problem with known alternative fixes

[mansona]

aren't these a bit generic? I think by default Vite is setting development in dev mode. If we're going to add something like this we shouldn't be doing this in the same PR that is fixing a breaking deployment

[mansona]

so is this now lying? it's not got a dependency on @glimmer/env but it's still using the types from it? I don't understand why we need this to be added if we're truely removing the dependency 🤔

[NullVoxPopuli]

it's types for build flags -- we removed the dep, but we still need type-checking to pass, and we compile it away

[mansona]

I have had a call with @NullVoxPopuli and all of my concerns have been addressed 👍 tldr we should probably not be using the name @glimmer/env any more because it isn't "real" and it contributes to confusion. This can be fixed in a follow up PR