-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 137
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Back onto real canary releases #2073
Open
ef4
wants to merge
4
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
use-real-canary
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
bd15867
Back onto real canary releases
ef4 c32cffd
cleaning up ember 6.0 api removals in test suite
ef4 4637911
remove unsupported non-colocated component template
ef4 e1f9c1e
make CommandWatcher dump logs at shutdown() when a command has failed
ef4 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.
Oops, something went wrong.
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is needed to eliminate non-colocated component usage, but it's causing failures because we currently have a real issue:
Extension search works in depscanning and in normal usage, but not in the dep pre-bundling that happens after depscanning. In this test, an addon uses global template resolution to access this component, which is failing because there's no hbs search.
It's unclear whether esbuild / vite will do a good or bad thing after we fix this, in that we definitely don't want pre-bundled dependencies pulling in any parts of the app.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also saw this and which is why i needed to do this change
Anyway the tests here in stage2 might need more changes. Maybe in a way that make them independent of vite dep optimization. Which is currently not happening. See this file
Edit: in this case it's actually accessing the app component?
The way here is to externalize it during bundling:
https://github.com/embroider-build/embroider/pull/1876/files#diff-a6c8071691a61acc68be864b34d3f338fd92e9bf5217c2d12403ac6029bca885R58
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, we will want to externalize during bundling. But not exactly in the way the code you linked is doing it.
That code is using rough heuristics for
isInApp
that are unlikely to be long-term true. We have more precise tracking already to know which modules are in the app.And when we externalize, we should do it via the request.specifier, not the resolution.filename. Because the way the request maps to the resolution can change during development, and the pre-bundled deps would not react to that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There are a few problems with that. The request is coming from an optimised dep and then the embroider resolution will not happen. It would also be hard to trace the dep chunk back to the origin.
What can be done is that we create a new specifier which includes both fromFile and specifier. I will try that out.