### What?
Print an error message to stdout if stylesheet fetching fails.
### Why?
To align behavior with the default mode. This PR fixes one integration
test case.
### How?
Closes PACK-2896
> Note: Did not add additional tests or make many changes to the utils,
possible refactoring on the following PR.
This PR split the legacy tests into four sections to improve the
maintenance and concurrency of CNA tests:
- `prompts`: target prompt interactions. `Y/n`
- `examples`: target `--example` and `--example-path` flags.
- `templates`: target the flag values such as `--app`, `--eslint`, etc.
- `package-manager`: target package managers: npm, pnpm, yarn, bun
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What
When triggering an interception route that has a parent with dynamic
params, and then later going to "refresh" the tree, either by calling
`router.refresh` or revalidating in a server action, the refresh action
would silently fail and the router would be in a bad state.
### Why
Because of the dependency that interception routes currently have on
`FlightRouterState` for dynamic params extraction, we need to make sure
the refetch has the full tree so that it can properly extract earlier
params. Since the refreshing logic traversed parallel routes and scoped
the refresh to that particular segment, it would skip over earlier
segments, and so when the server attempted to diff the tree, it would
return an updated tree that corresponded with the wrong segment
(`[locale]` rather than `["locale", "en", "d]`).
Separately, since a page segment might be `__PAGE__?{"locale": "en"}`
rather than just `__PAGE__`, this updates the refetch marker logic to do
a partial match on the page segment key.
### How
This keeps a reference to the root of the updated tree so that the
refresh always starts at the top. This has the side effect of
re-rendering more data when making the "stale" refetch request, but this
is necessary until we can decouple `FlightRouterState` from interception
routes.
shout-out to @steve-marmalade for helping find this bug and providing
excellent Replays to help track it down 🙏
x-ref:
- https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/63900
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2986
Currently we aren't detecting the draft mode case properly in
`unstable_cache` so the cache is unexpectedly being leveraged. This
ensures we bypass the cache for `unstable_cache` in draft mode the same
way we do for the fetch cache handling.
Fixes: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/60445
Closes NEXT-2987
This ensures we don't attempt passing a closed body to a
Request/Response object when a request is aborted as this triggers the
disturbed/locked error condition.
<details>
<summary>Example error</summary>
```sh
TypeError: Response body object should not be disturbed or locked
at extractBody (node:internal/deps/undici/undici:4507:17)
at new Request (node:internal/deps/undici/undici:5487:48)
at new NextRequest (/private/var/folders/cw/z0v1fby13ll4ytx_j3t8hhqh0000gn/T/next-install-d72b2dfb54a1417294505ab189942a38fd6bc139c24b9a8089fc3248568ff902/node_modules/.pnpm/file+..+next-repo-aef41a0c8a591889bcb0dc2e751aa71aa1c2e78c82d9e9b2fe3515c3d40f6c03+packages+n_wd7e7pnjmf2re4cc3l4tp6yzqe/node_modules/next/dist/server/web/spec-extension/request.js:33:14)
at NextRequestAdapter.fromNodeNextRequest (/private/var/folders/cw/z0v1fby13ll4ytx_j3t8hhqh0000gn/T/next-install-d72b2dfb54a1417294505ab189942a38fd6bc139c24b9a8089fc3248568ff902/node_modules/.pnpm/file+..+next-repo-aef41a0c8a591889bcb0dc2e751aa71aa1c2e78c82d9e9b2fe3515c3d40f6c03+packages+n_wd7e7pnjmf2re4cc3l4tp6yzqe/node_modules/next/dist/server/web/spec-extension/adapters/next-request.js:94:16)
at NextRequestAdapter.fromBaseNextRequest (/private/var/folders/cw/z0v1fby13ll4ytx_j3t8hhqh0000gn/T/next-install-d72b2dfb54a1417294505ab189942a38fd6bc139c24b9a8089fc3248568ff902/node_modules/.pnpm/file+..+next-repo-aef41a0c8a591889bcb0dc2e751aa71aa1c2e78c82d9e9b2fe3515c3d40f6c03+packages+n_wd7e7pnjmf2re4cc3l4tp6yzqe/node_modules/next/dist/server/web/spec-extension/adapters/next-request.js:70:35)
at doRender (/private/var/folders/cw/z0v1fby13ll4ytx_j3t8hhqh0000gn/T/next-install-d72b2dfb54a1417294505ab189942a38fd6bc139c24b9a8089fc3248568ff902/node_modules/.pnpm/file+..+next-repo-aef41a0c8a591889bcb0dc2e751aa71aa1c2e78c82d9e9b2fe3515c3d40f6c03+packages+n_wd7e7pnjmf2re4cc3l4tp6yzqe/node_modules/next/dist/server/base-server.js:1365:73)
```
</details>
Fixes: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/63481
Closes NEXT-2984
Closes NEXT-2904
Trying to submit a server action when JS is disabled (ie, no action
header in the request, and in the "progressively enhanced" case) for a
static resource results in a 405 error when deployed to Vercel. In the
absence of an action ID header, the request content-type is used to
signal that it shouldn't try and hit the static cache. However with
multipart/form-data, this will include the boundary. This updates the
matcher to consider a boundary string.
Fixes#58814
Closes NEXT-2980
This introduces an experimental router flag (`experimental.staleTimes`)
to change the router cache behavior. Specifically:
```ts
// next.config.js
module.exports = {
experimental: {
staleTimes: {
dynamic: <seconds>,
static: <seconds>,
},
},
};
```
- `dynamic` is the value that is used when the `prefetch` `Link` prop is
left unspecified. (Default 30 seconds)
- `static` is the value that is used when the `prefetch` `Link` prop is
`true`. (Default 5 minutes)
Additional details:
- Loading boundaries are considered reusable for the time period
indicated by the `static` property (default 5 minutes)
- This doesn't disable partial rendering support, **meaning shared
layouts won't automatically be refetched every navigation, only the new
segment data**.
- This also doesn't change back/forward caching behavior to ensure
things like scroll restoration etc still work nicely.
Please see the original proposal
[here](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/54075#discussioncomment-6754339)
for more information. The primary difference is that this is a global
configuration, rather than a per-segment configuration, and it isn't
applied to layouts. (We expect this to be a "stop-gap" and not the final
router caching solution)
Closes NEXT-2703
### What?
Match on `/_next/static/chunks/%5Broot%20of%20the%20server%5D__` instead
of `/_next/static/chunks/main` while testing.
### Why?
Turbopack does not use `/_next/static/chunks/main` as the name of the
chunk
### How?
Closes PACK-2874
---------
Co-authored-by: Jiachi Liu <inbox@huozhi.im>
### What?
This fixes an issue where the `nonce` attribute isn't set on
`next/script` elements that has the `afterInteractive` (the default)
strategy resulting in `<link rel="preload" as="script"/>` tags without a
nonce.
### Why?
For apps that uses 3rd party scripts (or any script) with a nonce loaded
via `next/script` this is necessary unless you want them all to use
`beforeInteractive` which isn't super nice for performance.
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What & Why
There was some code added in the catch-all route normalization that
doesn't seem to make sense -- it was checking if the provided `appPath`
depth was larger than the catch-all route depth, prior to inserting it.
But it was comparing depths in an inconsistent way (`.length` vs
`.length - 1`), and the catch all path was also considering the `@slot`
and `/page` suffix as part of the path depth.
This means that if you had a `@modal/[...catchAll]` slot, it wouldn't be
considered for a page like `/foo/bar/baz`, because `/foo/bar/baz`
(depth: 4 with the current logic) and `/@modal/[...catchAll]/page`
(depth: 3 with the current logic) signaled that the `/foo/bar/baz` route
was "more specific" and shouldn't match the catch-all.
I think this was most likely added to resolve a bug where we were
inserting optional catch-all (`[[...catchAll]]`) routes into parallel
slots. However, optional catch-all routes are currently unsupported with
parallel routes, so this feature didn't work properly and the partial
support introduced a bug for regular catch-all routes.
### How
This removes the confusing workaround and skips optional catch-all
segments in this handling. Separately, we can add support for optional
catch-all parallel routes, but doing so will require quite a bit more
changes & also similar handling in Turbopack. Namely, if have a
top-level optional catch-all, in both the Turbopack & current Webpack
implementation, that top-level catch-all wouldn't be matched. And if you
tried to have an optional catch-all slot, in both implementations, the
app would error with:
> You cannot define a route with the same specificity as a optional
catch-all route ("/" and "/[[...catchAll]]")
because our route normalization logic does not treat slots specificity
differently than pages.
**Note**: This keeps the test that was added when this logic was first
introduced in #60776 to ensure that the case this was originally added
for still passes.
Fixes#62948
Closes NEXT-2728
## What?
This test currently causes others to fail. Trying adding a skip for this
to see if other issues come up before porting it to be isolated:
```
● Test suite failed to run\n\n The name `source-map` was looked up in the Haste module map. It cannot be resolved, because there exists several different files, or packages, that provide a module for that particular name and platform. The platform is generic (no extension). You must delete or exclude files until there remains only one of these:\n\n * `/root/actions-runner/_work/next.js/next.js/packages/next/src/compiled/source-map/package.json` (package)\n * `/root/actions-runner/_work/next.js/next.js/test/integration/app-dir-export/output/standalone/packages/next/dist/compiled/source-map/package.json` (package)\n\n at ModuleMap._assertNoDuplicates (../node_modules/.pnpm/jest-haste-map@29.7.0/node_modules/jest-haste-map/build/ModuleMap.js:189:11)\n
```
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2955
Closes: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/63623
When a relative assetPrefix was set (e.g. `/custom-asset-prefix`),
bundle fetching would always return a 404 as the assetPrefix was not
removed from filesystem path
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Fixes#63871
-->
### What?
Adds safe traversal to rewrite `has` items in a certain new
(`isInterceptionRouteRewrite()` added in the v14.2.0 canaries) check to
the rewrite routes.
### Why?
The new check assumed that all `has` arrays had at least one item, when
previously Next.js accepted rewrites with empty `has`. Adding safe
traversal doesn't negatively impact the check, as the check only needs
rewrites with the first item.
Fixes#63871
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What?
Pass the names of side-effect-free packages specified in `experimental.optimizePackageImports`.
Turbopack counterpart: https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/7731
### Why?
Some packages like `@tremor/react` causes a problem without `optimizePackageImports`.
### How?
Closes PACK-2527
### What
Strip the search query for the `urlPathname` passed down to metadata
handling.
### Why
This is because the `urlPathname` from `staticGenerationStore` contains
query, so it will contain `?rsc` query for client navigation, which lead
to the relative path canonical url (e.g. `./`) will have the search
query along with it. This PR is to remove that and make sure always uses
pathname.
Reported by @pacocoursey
Closes NEXT-2963
### What & Why
When an RSC triggers `navigate` after the shell has already been sent to
the client, a meta tag is inserted to signal to the browser it needs to
perform an MPA navigation. This is primarily used for bot user agents,
since we wouldn't have been able to provide a proper redirect status
code (since it occurred after the initial response was sent).
However, the router would trigger a SPA navigation, while the `<meta>`
tag lagged to perform an MPA navigation, resulting in 2 navigations to
the same URL.
### How
When the client side code attempts to handle the redirect, we treat it
like an MPA navigation. This will suspend in render and trigger a
`location.push`/`location.replace` to the targeted URL. As a result,
only one of these navigation events will win.
Fixes#59800Fixes#62463
Closes NEXT-2952
Closes NEXT-2719
When a server action performs a redirect, we currently initiate a `HEAD`
request to the targeted URL to verify if it has a proper RSC response.
If it does, it then invokes a GET and streams the response. This leads
to an extra request to the server which can be costly and poor for
performance. If the `GET` returns an invalid RSC response, we'll discard
the response. The client router will also see the invalid response which
will signal that it needs to perform an MPA navigation to the targeted
URL.
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2956
### What
Supports partial `get-page-static-info` in turbopack. Since turbopack
doesn't have equivalent place to webpack's ondemandhandler, it uses
turbopack's build time transform rule instead.
As noted, this is partial implementation to pagestatic info as it does
not have existing js side evaluations. Assertions will be added
gradually to ensure regressions, for now having 1 assertion for
getstaticparams.
Closes PACK-2849
### What
When calling `revalidatePath` or `revalidateTag` in a server action for
an intercepted route with dynamic segments, the page would do a full
browser refresh.
### Why
When constructing rewrites for interception routes, the route params
leading up to the interception route are "voided" with a
`__NEXT_EMPTY_PARAM__` demarcation. When it comes time to look up the
values for these dynamic segments, since the params aren't going to be
part of the URL, they get matched via `FlightRouterState`
([ref](d67d658ce7/packages/next/src/server/app-render/app-render.tsx (L153-L201))).
The `shouldProvideFlightRouterState` variable only passes it through for
RSC requests; however, since the server action will perform the action &
return the flight data in a single pass, that means the updated tree
from the server action isn't going to receive the `FlightRouterState`
when constructing the new tree. This means the old tree will have a
`["locale", "en", "d"]` segment, and the new tree from the server action
will have `"[locale]"`. When the router detects this kind of segment
mismatch, it assumes the user navigated to a new root layout, and
triggers an MPA navigation.
### How
This unconditionally provides the `FlightRouterState` to
`makeGetDynamicParamFromSegment` so that it can properly extract dynamic
params for interception routes. We currently enforce interception routes
to be dynamic due to this `FlightRouterState` dependency.
Fixes#59796
Closes NEXT-2079
`applyRouterStatePatchToTree` had been refactored to support the case of
not skipping the `__DEFAULT__` segment, so that `router.refresh` or
revalidating in a server action wouldn't break the router. (More details
in this #59585)
This was a stop-gap and not an ideal solution, as this behavior means
`router.refresh()` would effectively behave like reloading the page,
where "stale" segments (ones that went from `__PAGE__` -> `__DEFAULT__`)
would disappear.
This PR reverts that handling. The next PR in this stack (#63608) adds
handling to refresh "stale" segments as well.
Note: We expect the test case that was added in #59585 to fail here, but
it is re-enabled in the next PR in the stack.
Note 2: #63608 was accidentally merged into this PR, despite being a
separate entry in the stack. As such, I've copied the issues from that
PR into this one so they can be linked. See the notes from that PR for
the refresh fix details.
Fixes#60815Fixes#60950Fixes#51711Fixes#51714Fixes#58715Fixes#60948Fixes#62213Fixes#61341
Closes [NEXT-1845](https://linear.app/vercel/issue/NEXT-1845)
Closes [NEXT-2030](https://linear.app/vercel/issue/NEXT-2030)
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2903
## What?
Currently `next build` with Turbopack fails to run in certain tests (as
expected), the problem with that is that the `afterAll()` calls assume
the server was started, which doesn't happen when the build fails, and
then causes a timeout that can't be reported if an error happens. This
change ensures the error around `server['__app']` doesn't happen.
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2933
### What
Supports root segment config inherit from layout. Currently route
segment config only runs agasint own source, so individual route segment
config works but if the config is set in layout level it is being
ignored. PR introduces root segment and pass into each route if tree
level have a corresponding layout.
Closes PACK-2839
### What
In static generation phase of app page, if there's any case that we're
receiving 3xx/4xx status code from the response, we 're setting it into
the static generation meta now to make sure they're still returning the
same status after build.
### Why
During static generation if there's any 3xx/4xx status code that is set
in the response, we should respect to it, such as the ones caused by
using `notFound()` to mark as 404 response or `redirect` to mark as
`307` response.
Closes NEXT-2895
Fixes#51021Fixes#62228
Recently the serverActionReducer was updated to no longer use React's
thenable type to carry resolution/rejection information. However the
rejection reason was not updated so now when a server action fails we
were rejecting with `undefined` rather than the rejected reason. This
change updates the reject to use the rejection value.
Closes NEXT-2943
This ensures that even if a `loading.js` returns `null`, that we still
render a `Suspense` boundary, as it's perfectly valid to have an empty
fallback.
This was accidentally lost in #62346 -- this brings back the
`hasLoading` prop which will check the loading module itself (rather
than the `ReactNode`) for truthiness, and I've added a test to avoid
another regression.
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.
To make sure your PR is handled as smoothly as possible we request that
you follow the checklist sections below.
Choose the right checklist for the change(s) that you're making:
## For Contributors
### Improving Documentation
- Run `pnpm prettier-fix` to fix formatting issues before opening the
PR.
- Read the Docs Contribution Guide to ensure your contribution follows
the docs guidelines:
https://nextjs.org/docs/community/contribution-guide
### Adding or Updating Examples
- The "examples guidelines" are followed from our contributing doc
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md
- Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm build && pnpm lint`. See
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/repository/linting.md
### Fixing a bug
- Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- Tests added. See:
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
### Adding a feature
- Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature
request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR. (A
discussion must be opened, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/new?category=ideas)
- Related issues/discussions are linked using `fixes #number`
- e2e tests added
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/core/testing.md#writing-tests-for-nextjs)
- Documentation added
- Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- Errors have a helpful link attached, see
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md
## For Maintainers
- Minimal description (aim for explaining to someone not on the team to
understand the PR)
- When linking to a Slack thread, you might want to share details of the
conclusion
- Link both the Linear (Fixes NEXT-xxx) and the GitHub issues
- Add review comments if necessary to explain to the reviewer the logic
behind a change
### What?
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes NEXT-2936
