Bug - Package Publishing - Published Libraries should follow NPM dual module package standards

PatternFly libraries should follow NPM standards for publishing dual module (CommonJS/ESModule) packages.

PatternFly packages have

  "main": "dist/js/index.js",
  "module": "dist/esm/index.js",
  "types": "dist/esm/index.d.ts",

This is a really early format when es modules were being initially developed and not supported by modern tooling.

NPM documentation links to this as the right way to handle dual module packages.

{
  "type": "module",
  "exports": {
    "import": "./index.mjs",
    "require": "./index.cjs"
  }
}

Modern tooling like vite builds libraries with a combination of both for compatibility.

{
  "name": "my-lib",
  "type": "module",
  "main": "./dist/my-lib.umd.cjs",
  "types": "./dist/my-lib.d.ts",
  "module": "./dist/my-lib.js",
  "exports": {
    ".": {
      "import": "./dist/my-lib.js",
      "require": "./dist/my-lib.umd.cjs"
    }
  }
}

This is currently blocking us from using vitest to test because it gets really confused. It tries to import the code as ESM but then is unhappy that the package is not marked as type "module". If we manually add type 'module', it then runs into some code that uses a 'require', which is not valid in the scope of a module.

PatternFly packages should support both ESM and CommonJS using NPM standards for better compatibility.

This affects all PF packages not just react-core.

检查所有 PatternFly 包中 issue 所示的包元数据字段，然后使用 vitest 重现当前的模块解析问题。首先查看 NPM package-examples 和 Vite library-mode 参考资料；完成标准是每个受影响的包都通过标准包元数据支持 ESM 和 CommonJS。