feat: vite runtime renamed to module runner

[sheremet-va]

Description

This PR renames "Runtime API" into "Runner API".

I also removed executeEntrypoint as a method and renamed executeUrl to import. Runner API expects "triggeredBy" in "full-reload" event. full-reload now automatically finds the entrypoint. If you don't want to support HMR, create a runner with hmr: false.

This PR does not add support for granular HMR handling.

Additional context

---

What is the purpose of this pull request?

• Bug fix
• New Feature
• Documentation update
• Other

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

• Read the Contributing Guidelines, especially the Pull Request Guidelines.
• Check that there isn't already a PR that solves the problem the same way to avoid creating a duplicate.
• Provide a description in this PR that addresses what the PR is solving, or reference the issue that it solves (e.g. fixes #123).
• Update the corresponding documentation if needed.
• Ideally, include relevant tests that fail without this PR but pass with it.

[stackblitz]

Run & review this pull request in StackBlitz Codeflow.

[patak-dev]

/ecosystem-ci run

[vite-ecosystem-ci]

📝 Ran ecosystem CI on 3c46f97: Open

suite	result	latest scheduled
analogjs	❌ failure	✅ success
astro	❌ failure	✅ success
nuxt	❌ failure	✅ success
previewjs	❌ failure	✅ success
vike	❌ failure	✅ success
vite-plugin-svelte	❌ failure	✅ success
vite-plugin-vue	❌ failure	✅ success
vitest	❌ failure	✅ success

✅ histoire, ladle, laravel, marko, qwik, rakkas, sveltekit, unocss, vite-plugin-pwa, vite-plugin-react, vite-plugin-react-pages, vite-plugin-react-swc, vite-setup-catalogue, vitepress

[patak-dev]

module-runner doesn't feel that right with the two words. I wonder if we should have something more generic here. Is there other things that may be imported by runtimes later on?
Should we keep it as:

import { ModuleRunner } from 'vite/runtime'

with the meaning that it the entry point for Runtimes to import from?

[sheremet-va]

module-runner was something that you proposed 😄

Is there other things that may be imported by runtimes later on?

No, the idea is to keep this as small as possible. Making it generic would encourage putting more things here.

[patak-dev]

I'm good re-proposing stuff 😅

I don't think it will encourage us to put more things there. I kind of like vite/runtime better here. But we can move forward and later on rename the things if we want. Maybe @sapphi-red or others can chip in to see what sounds better to them.

[sapphi-red]

I vote to module-runner. I'm fine with runner, too.

runtime feels a bit different to me. In the new environment API, I understand that the term "runtime" means the actual runtime (e.g. node, deno, workerd) and not the module runner/loader/executor built using Vite's API.

[patak-dev]

/ecosystem-ci run vite-plugin-vue

[vite-ecosystem-ci]

📝 Ran ecosystem CI on 4ed545b: Open

✅ vite-plugin-vue

[patak-dev]

Leaving approval, @sheremet-va feel free to merge whenever you want this. I'm not merging it in case you want to get a review from @sapphi-red first.

Note: the same CI tests are failing in the target branch.

[sapphi-red]

LGTM 👍