Removed qs

[gkiely]

Based off this comment https://github.com/stripe/stripe-node/issues/2038#issuecomment-2004751719

Includes a lightweight alternative to qs.stringify that can run in worker environments. I have added 80% of the tests from the qs library, if you think this is a good approach I can add the remainder. I wanted to confirm it is viable before I put any more time into it :)

[CLAassistant]

All committers have signed the CLA.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}

[helenye-stripe]

Hi @gkiely. Thanks a lot for this PR! We would really appreciate if you could continue your work here 💯

[chenglou]

Seems like the only failures are prettier-related?

[prathmesh-stripe]

@chenglou Our CI pipeline does not run the test suite until build failures are resolved first. We are waiting for @gkiely to make progress on this and add rest of the tests that they intend to add in this PR.

[v1rtl]

may I help with the PR?

[helenye-stripe]

Hi! Thanks for submitting, we'll watch the tagged issue!

[chyzwar]

Any reason why stripe cannot just use URLSearchParams ?

[v1rtl]

CI seems to be failing

[chenglou]

Is this still happening? Removing qs would be great!

[vytskalt]

Yes, this would be amazing. qs adds an extra 18 (!) packages through transitive dependencies which is crazy for something that should be so simple

[mbroshi-stripe]

Hi @gkiely! Checking in to see if you still plan on continuing this work

[gkiely]

@mbroshi-stripe would it be best to update the stringify function to add support for arrayFormat or alternatively this library supports all the qs options: https://github.com/payloadcms/qs-esm?

My main concern in adding a custom stringify/parse function is if later more functionality is needed.