Don't wrap mix path with asset()

[dwightwatson]

This removes the asset function from wrapping the asset path. I've created a similar fix before (##17727) and it was re-introduced in #19968 which broke one of my apps, and looks like it may have affected some other developers too.

This allows developers to prefix the asset path with whatever host they like and if they choose not to it'll just be a relative path on their own application, so it should work just the same.

[dwightwatson]

I see this has actually been done already (#20165), sorry about the duplication.

I'll leave this open as it adds a test for the expected functionality in case you're a fan of that. Would hopefully prevent this from happening again.

[themsaid]

I'm not accepting any Mix changes from anyone accept @JeffreyWay for at least a month.

Quoting Taylor in #20165

[dwightwatson]

@themsaid the only outstanding change of this PR (the change to Laravel Mix has already been made upstream) is the test that it adds. I think that's worth considering so we don't break this feature again.

[themsaid]

The PR you mention #20165 was reverted, your PR introduces the same changes plus a test, so I'm afraid this won't be merged as well. sorry :)

[dwightwatson]

Oh gotcha, didn't realise that PR was since reverted too. Shame as it does break backwards compatibility and we're going to have to make changes to manually strip out the domain name from the output of the method. No worries, I appreciate you getting back to me.

[mathieutu]

@dwightwatson I agree with you. I didn't expect this weird usage of mix method.

I'm for deleting the asset method too and, so, for merging your PR (even more because of the tests), but Taylor's reactions about all this mix changes are just... really unsettling, and disappointing.
I'm afraid we can't do anything anymore 😥.

[it-can]

@JeffreyWay can you please help us with this one?