Add Q&A regarding import

kgryte · kgryte · commit d236434e37c0 · 2017-02-02T23:56:54.000-08:00
diff --git a/FAQ.md b/FAQ.md
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
 * [Why reimplement module functionality already available on npm?](#reimplementing-existing-packages)
 * [Backward compatibility?](#backward-compatibility)
 * [Why use semicolons?](#semicolons)
+* [Import support?](#import-support)
 * [Promise support?](#promise-support)
 * [ES2015 and beyond?](#es2015)
 * [Why a monorepo?](#monorepo)
@@ -278,6 +279,30 @@ For the following reasons:
 <!-- </faq-question> -->
 
 
+<!-- <faq-question> -->
+
+---
+
+<a name="import-support"></a>
+
+### Import support?
+
+No. This stance may be reevaluated when the following conditions are met:
+
+1. The specification has finalized.
+1. The specification is widely and consistently implemented.
+1. Node.js provides official support.
+1. Inclusion maintains backward compatibility with earlier Node.js versions and non-ES2015 environments.
+1. Inclusion does not require a transpiler toolchain.
+
+
+#### But what about tree shaking?
+
+Tree shaking (i.e., removing unused symbols) treats the symptom, not the disease. A disciplined emphasis on modularity and crafting implementations which do one thing and do one thing well obviates the need for removing unused symbols.
+
+<!-- </faq-question> -->
+
+
 <!-- <faq-question> -->
 
 ---
