Environment–patching vs. non–environment–patching webshims in open source node modules - node-modules

Question

Short version
Would you, as a web app developer, be OK with a gadget or a library that requires some ES5 shims like these for it to work in IE7&8? How about if it included these shims itself, thus patching your global JavaScript?
Long version
When writing an open source node module that is meant to be run also in old browsers like IE7 and IE8, where should I "get" my ES5 Array.prototype.forEach, Object.keys and such?
Should I rely on environment–patching shims (like like https://github.com/es-shims/es5-shim) or non–environment–patching shims (like https://www.npmjs.org/package/lodash.keys)?
The original issue is this.
I supplied my own answer to this but it is inconclusive. I would like to ask:
What is the standard for this? Is there a common policy?
Are there performance implications that are meaningful?
What other upsides and downsides have I not included in my answer?
Are there module maintenance considerations I have not taken into account?

Answer 1

Environment–patching shims
Shims like https://github.com/es-shims/es5-shim "monkey-patch a JavaScript context to contain all EcmaScript 5 methods that can be faithfully emulated with a legacy JavaScript engine", thus allowing me to write my module with some of the ES5 methods.
Downsides
My module code is simpler ([1, 2, 3].forEach(function(){});).
Upsides
I must include shims in my testing setup, if I'm testing in those browsers that need them.
I "force" my module's consumers to rely on shims.
Non–environment–patching shims"
Or, "non–shims" like lodash.keys or foreach, can be used.
Upsides
I don't need to use shims in my tests.
I don't "force" my module's consumers to use shims.
Downsides
My module's code is less pretty, like
var forEach = require("foreach");
forEach([1, 2, 3], function(){});
And I can't use as a method, which negates possibility of chaining.