This PR fixes the issue where an inline Server Action gets exported. As
this isn't the designed use case for inline Server Actions (they're
supposed to be defined and used inside another closure, such as
components), we are not handling the export cases currently:
```ts
export async function action() {
"use server"
...
}
<form action={action}/>
```
...which gets compiled into:
```ts
export async function action() {} // No-op function
<form action={...actionReference...}/>
```
Note that everything works inside this module until you `import` that
action and use it in another module.
To tackle that, this PR changes how that works as described in
`server/27/output.js`.
Closes NEXT-2140
This PR stabilizes the previously introduced experimental config options
for providing a custom cache handler (for both ISR as well as the Data
Cache) and for disabling or configuring the in-memory cache size. The
example usage would be as follows:
```js
// next.config.js
module.exports = {
cacheHandler: require.resolve('./cache-handler.js'),
cacheMaxMemorySize: 0 // disable default in-memory caching
}
```
This PR also updates the documentation to better reflect how to use the
custom cache handler when self-hosting. Further information will be
added in a following PR that also includes a full example of a custom
cache handler that implements `revalidateTag` as well as passing in
custom cache tags. The API reference docs have been updated here, as
well as a version history added.
I also noticed that we currently have two duplicated versions of the ISR
docs in the Pages Router docs: both for rendering and for data fetching.
Data Fetching is the correct location for this page. There were no other
references to the rendering version in the docs, so that must have been
an accident. I'll need to a get a redirect going for that regardless.
Tests have been updated for `cacheHandler` and I added a new test for
`cacheMaxMemorySize`.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jiachi Liu <inbox@huozhi.im>
### What?
When webpack loaders are applied on a page file and it's renamed with
the `as` key, layout segment key no longer matches. This fixes that
### Why?
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
Closes PACK-2251
## What?
Skip postcss config resolving in node_modules for Turbopack. This
matches current Next.js on webpack closer as that only resolves the
postcss config from the project root. The additional feature Turbopack
has is that it can find a postcss config relative to the css being
compiled. This is useful for e.g. reducing the amount of overhead
certain postcss plugins that only have to run against a single file take
(i.e. Tailwindcss).
Depends on github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/7012 landing first.
<!-- 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-2109
---------
Co-authored-by: Tobias Koppers <tobias.koppers@googlemail.com>
This reapplies the `experimental.missingSuspenseWithCSRBailout` option
to bail out during build if there was a missing suspense boundary when
using something that bails out to client side rendering (like
`useSearchParams()`). See #57642
Closes [NEXT-1770](https://linear.app/vercel/issue/NEXT-1770)
### What?
* creates a separate chunk group for client components per layout
segment (before it was per page)
### Why?
This fixes a bug with css loading on client transitions as next.js
assumes that the chunk group for the unchanged layout segments are
already loaded (fixes PACK-2163)
Closes PACK-2232
The following spans are either added or displayed by default:
* `NextNodeServer.findPageComponents` - page components
resolution/require
* `NextNodeServer.getLayoutOrPageModule` - load modules (webpack or
turbopack)
This would allow different apps to setup fetch instrumentation similar
to `@opentelemetry/instrumentation-http` and
`@opentelemetry/instrumentation-fetch` without duplicating fetch spans
and avoiding confusion with context propagation.
This ensures when a dependency has a recursive require our should ignore
handling doesn't accidentally loop back and forth.
x-ref: https://github.com/lovell/sharp/issues/3944
Closes NEXT-2121
As Barrel Optimization might split one file into multiple different
modules, i.e. when you import different values from it, the target file
might be transformed differently, we can no longer rely on the file path
as the identifier of the client reference.
This fix adds a suffix (`'@' + this._module.matchResource`) to the
identifier so it looks like
`/filepath/file.js@__barrel_optimize__?names=Foo`.
Here's also a quick diagram to explain:
Closes#59804.
Closes NEXT-2108.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jiachi Liu <inbox@huozhi.im>
- Both the standalone server and the `startServer` function it calls
attempt to stop the server on `SIGINT` and `SIGTERM` in different ways.
This lets `server.js` yield to `startServer`
- The cleanup function in `startServer` was not waiting for the server
to close before calling `process.exit`. This lets it wait for any
in-flight requests to finish processing before exiting the process
- Sends `SIGKILL` to the child process in `next dev`, which should have
the same effect of immediately shutting down the server on `SIGTERM` or
`SIGINT`
fixes: #53661
refs: #59551
------
Previously #59551 attempted to fix#53661, but had broken some tests in
the process. It looks like the final commit was also missing an intended
change to `utils.ts`. This should fix those issues as well as introduce
a new set of tests for the graceful shutdown feature.
In the last PR I was squashing and force-pushing updates along the way
but it made it difficult to track the changes. This time I'm pushing
quite a few commits to make it easier to track the changes and refactors
I've made, with the idea that this should be squashed before being
merged.
<!-- 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 #
-->
### What
Sometimes the display of the error overlay is not consistent even when
you fixed the error
Example:
* You have a client page, and you add metadata export, Next.js will
error that it's not allowed in client component.
* You fix it, but the error overlay is not disappeared. Or you fix it,
then introduce it again, then fix it again, the error overlay is still
there.
### How
We're checking if the HMR webpack hash is changed to decide if we're
going to do a hot update in `BUILT` and `SYNC` event, but we update the
hash at the very beginning of the event handler. `isUpdateAvailable()`
will return `false` in the later calls but the hash has already changed
before. So we check if they change before applying hot updates, and then
use it later with `isUpdateAvailable()` to determine if necessary to
process a new hot update
Closes NEXT-2107
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Neutkens <tim@timneutkens.nl>
### What?
removes to old next build turbopack version. It will be implemented in a
different way.
### Why?
We want to use next.rs api for that.
Closes PACK-2239
When you're using `noStore()` with `fetch` it's currently saying "auto
cache" in cache missed reason, adding "noStore call" here to show it's
caused by using with `unstable_noStore`
```
GET /no-store 200 in 4069ms
│ GET https://next-data-api-endpoint.vercel.app/api/random?another-no-cache 200 in 257ms (cache: SKIP)
│ │ Cache missed reason: (noStore call)
```
Closes NEXT-2097
### What
We're applying react-refresh to browser layer and inject ESM or CJS
helper based on file type. Some package from `trasnpilePackages` might
contain CJS browser bundle. And injecting ESM helper breaks them.
Actually they don't need to have fast refresh ability since they're in
`node_modules`.
### How
Skip react-refresh for transpiled packages as they're in node_modules
and won't change.
Fixes#56487
Closes NEXT-2061
### Depends on
- #60577
---
A popstate navigation reads data from the local cache. It does not issue
new network requests (unless the cache entries have been evicted). So,
when navigating with back/forward, we should not switch back to the PPR
loading state. We should render the full, cached dynamic data
immediately.
To implement this, on a popstate navigation, we update the cache to drop
the prefetch data for any segment whose dynamic data was already
received. We clone the entire cache node tree and set the `prefetchRsc`
field to `null` to prevent it from being rendered. (We can't mutate the
node in place because Cache Node is a concurrent data structure.)
Technically, what we're actually checking is whether the dynamic network
response was received. But since it's a streaming response, this does
not mean that all the dynamic data has fully streamed in. It just means
that _some_ of the dynamic data was received. But as a heuristic, we
assume that the rest dynamic data will stream in quickly, so it's still
better to skip the prefetch state.
Closes NEXT-2084
This allows us to more accurately attribute whether a trace was created
in a Turbopack session by doing so at trace creation time rather than
trace upload time.
Test Plan: Configured next to send traces to a local server and verified
this information is attached to the top-level of the trace.
Closes PACK-2233
### What?
Throwing a `notFound()` error inside of a segment that has an error
boundary will cause it to be handled by the segment's error boundary
rather than a parent not-found boundary.
### Why?
We assume anything that hits an `ErrorBoundary` is an actual error, but
this should not be the case when the caught error is one that is handled
by Next.js.
### How?
This checks if the caught error is one that is expected to be handled
someplace else.
Closes NEXT-2080
[slack
x-ref](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03S8ED1DKM/p1705003189392509?thread_ts=1704868742.169129&cid=C03S8ED1DKM)
This updates our default error rate to be much more precise and reduce
false positives by increasing the default size of the client filter we
generate. We can afford to increase the default size as it compresses
extremely well and gives us more accurate navigations. This carries over
the failing test case from https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/59293
which showed one case of false positive in a smaller filter.
Closes: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/47486
Closes NEXT-2070
---------
Co-authored-by: Cris Vergara <cris.vergara@bookofthemonth.com>
## Description
This PR ensures that the default prettier config is used for examples
and templates.
This config is compatible with `prettier@3` as well (upgrading prettier
is bigger change that can be a future PR).
## Changes
- Updated `.prettierrc.json` in root with `"trailingComma": "es5"` (will
be needed upgrading to prettier@3)
- Added `examples/.prettierrc.json` with default config (this will
change every example)
- Added `packages/create-next-app/templates/.prettierrc.json` with
default config (this will change every template)
## Related
- Fixes#54402
- Closes#54409
## What
This fixes when the deep nested routes throws a client side error, it
can still be caught by the `global-error.js`
## How
We should always resolve global-error from root app directory instead of
current route's layout. Also fixed a bad test before where the
gloabl-error.js is not located correctly
Fixes#53756
Closes NEXT-1760
When sending post requests but it's not server action, skip logging
warning or calling non-existed server action. Instead we only log the
warning like missnig headers for server actions when it's a server
action and call the action handler when it's decoded as a function
Fixes#58152
Closes NEXT-1761
### Why?
We have more supported options than unsupported ones.
Also new options added to next.js now should always be supported by
turbopack.
Closes PACK-2023
This forwards spans created in the hmr client to the server-side tracer.
Test Plan: Loaded a page and verified navigation-to-hydration span is
recorded.
Closes PACK-2226
### What?
This fixes a race condition where loadClientReferenceManifest reads an
empty file. All other manifest already have retries, this adds it for
the client reference manifest too for consistency.
Closes WEB-1727
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Neutkens <tim@timneutkens.nl>
The PR further reduces the `create-next-app` installation size by
another 80 KiB:
- Replace the callback version of Node.js built-in `dns` API usage with
`dns/promise` + async/await
- Replace `got` w/ `fetch` since Next.js and `create-next-app` now
target Node.js 18.17.0+
- Download and extract the tar.gz file in the memory (without creating
temporary files). This improves the performance.
- Some other minor refinements.
Following these changes, the size of `dist/index.js` is now 536 KiB.
fixes#58640
When there is no tsconfig.json, `npm run dev` generates `tsconfig.json`,
which has no `target` option.
But create-next-app generates `tsconfig.json` with `"target": "es5"`
Related to: #44567
Related to: #14390
### What?
Fixes#58570
### How?
Include the **basePath** to the **fetchUrl** to ensure the relative URL
matches the app when deployed under a **basePath**.
### Tested?
I have added an **e2e** test with a basic custom server & server action
redirect.
This test was confirmed to **catch** the bug when running it without the
fix in place. When running it you will get the failed result.
```
FAIL test/e2e/app-dir/app-basepath-custom-server/index.test.ts (12.293 s)
custom-app-render
✕ redirects properly when server action handler uses `redirect` (1661 ms)
● custom-app-render › redirects properly when server action handler uses `redirect`
expect(received).not.toEqual(expected) // deep equality
Expected: not ["/base/another", 200]
45 | // if broken, this will include a 200 from the /base/another indicating a full page redirect
46 | responses.forEach((res) => {
> 47 | expect(res).not.toEqual(['/base/another', 200])
| ^
48 | })
49 | })
50 | }
at toEqual (e2e/app-dir/app-basepath-custom-server/index.test.ts:47:25)
at Array.forEach (<anonymous>)
at Object.forEach (e2e/app-dir/app-basepath-custom-server/index.test.ts:46:17)
Test Suites: 1 failed, 1 total
Tests: 1 failed, 1 total
Snapshots: 0 total
Time: 12.321 s, estimated 22 s
Ran all test suites matching /test\/e2e\/app-dir\/app-basepath-custom-server/i.
ELIFECYCLE Command failed with exit code 1.
ELIFECYCLE Command failed with exit code 1.
ELIFECYCLE Command failed with exit code 1.
```
### Notes
Not sure if there are any edge cases where the `fetchUrl` is now broken
in other use cases where there is no **basePath**, I assume the string
would be empty `""` and result in the same URL as before, but not sure?
### Disclosure
~I am not that familiar with the Next.js code base and this is my first
PR. I was struggling to find out how to grab the **basePath** from
`next.config.js`, but then noticed the **assetPrefix** inside the
function matched, so decided to use that for minimal change. I don't
know if there are any caveats with this approach, but could consider
switching to pull directly from the config file, if that's possible?~
**Update:** Figured out where the **basePath** came from and switched
it.
---------
Co-authored-by: Colton Ehrman <cehrman@paypal.com>
Co-authored-by: Tim Neutkens <tim@timneutkens.nl>
### What?
enable the custom allocator flag to enable mialloc.
allow to configure custom allocator on napi level.
### Why?
It's faster and we had it enabled before.
It was disable before as `next-core` is used with no default features in
workspace
Native Build: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/actions/runs/7388725004
Closes PACK-2185
---------
Co-authored-by: OJ Kwon <1210596+kwonoj@users.noreply.github.com>
This PR introduces 2 experimental options for doing more work in the
webpack build in parallel instead of in serial. These options may
improve the performance of builds at the cost of more memory.
`parallelServerAndEdgeCompiles`: This option kicks off the builds for
both `server` and `edge-server` at the same time instead of waiting for
each to complete before the next one. In applications that have many
server and edge functions, this can increase performance by doing that
work in parallel. This can be used with `next build` or `next
experimental-compile`.
`parallelServerBuildTraces`: This option starts the server build traces
as soon as the server compile completes and runs it in the background
while the other compilations are happening. With this option enabled,
some unnecessary work may be done since ordinarily the client
compilation provides information that can reduce the amount of tracing
necessary. However, since it is in parallel with the other work, it may
still result in a faster build in total at the cost of more memory. This
option is already the default when using `next experimental-compile` but
can now be used when `next build` is used also.
---------
Co-authored-by: Delba de Oliveira <32464864+delbaoliveira@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What
`/default` segments were considered valid page outputs to handle
catch-all route normalization (see #60240) but they shouldn't leak into
the prerender manifest. This filters them out at build time.
Closes NEXT-2053
In the output shared js chunks section we're showing all shared chunks
atm, some of them might be too small (few bytes) due to code split. e.g.
in the below example, main-app is only `218B`, we're going to group all
the chunks below 10KB together into one item line
#### Before
```
+ First Load JS shared by all 81.9 kB
├ chunks/381-ffe155bc1c63f064.js 26.7 kB
├ chunks/8766613a-1f3d501627fe8359.js 53.3 kB
├ chunks/main-app-80d2c0fe59f30ae2.js 218 B
└ chunks/webpack-e6edcd8ebd35b832.js 1.68 kB
```
#### After
```
+ First Load JS shared by all 83.7 kB
├ chunks/4921c021-73266f862a05e4e2.js 53.3 kB
├ chunks/596-73310d23ef824244.js 28.6 kB
└ other shared chunks (total) 1.83 kB
```
Closes NEXT-2046
Closes NEXT-1970
### What?
When using catch-all routes in conjunction with parallel routes, and
when importing a client component (`"use client"`), the build would fail
with the following error:
> Could not find the module "PathToClientComponent" in the React Client
Manifest. This is probably a bug in the React Server Components bundler.
### Why?
`flight-manifest-plugin` generates manifests for each page entry. The
`clientModules` portion of this manifest is used by React to load the
appropriate client module. When React attempts to render a component
tree and detects a module that it cannot find, it will throw this error.
To illustrate why it isn't in the tree, consider the following example:
```
app
page.tsx
layout.tsx
@slot
[...catchAll]
page.tsx
```
```tsx
// app/layout.tsx
export default function Layout({children, slot}) {
return <>{children} {slot}</>
}
```
```tsx
// app/@slot/[...catchAll]/page.tsx
import Link from 'next/link'
export default function Page() {
return <Link href="/">Test</Link>
}
```
When visiting `/`, we'd expect both the catch-all `@slot` and the root
page to render. At build time, we'll generate a client reference
manifest for `/` and `/[...catchAll]` since both are page components.
However, the `@slot` imports a client component. When we attempt to load
the client reference manifest for `/`, it will ignore the catch-all
slot's manifest, resulting in the error.
### How?
The `entryNameToGroupName` function seems to already exist to handle
this scenario for other cases. For example,
`app/(group)/@named/foo/page` needs to know about any manifests
associated with `app/foo`. This updates the code to apply similar
handling to catchAll segments. When applying this change to the example
mentioned earlier, it will properly merge the manifests for both
`app/@slot/[...catchAll]/page.tsx` and `app/page.tsx` because both will
be part of the `/` group.
Closes NEXT-1908
Fixes#59747Fixes#59510
### Fixing a bug
### What?
When basePath is added, intercepted routes stop working correctly.
### Why?
For them, basePath was not added at all.
### How?
Added basePath to the rewrites for intercepted routes.
Fixes#52624, #58268
### What?
This PR adds a new flag called
`experimental.missingSuspenseWithCSRBailout`.
### Why?
Via this PR we can break a build when calling `useSearchParams` without
wrapping it in a suspense boundary.
If no suspense boundaries are present, Next.js must avoid doing SSR and
defer the entire page's rendering to the client. This is not a great
default. Instead, we will now break the build so that you are forced to
add a boundary.
### How?
Add an experimental flag. If a `BailoutToCSRError` error is thrown and
this flag is enabled, the build should fail and log an error, instead of
showing a warning and bail the entire page to client-side rendering.
Closes NEXT-1770
---------
Co-authored-by: Balázs Orbán <info@balazsorban.com>
Co-authored-by: Wyatt Johnson <accounts+github@wyattjoh.ca>
### Fixing a bug
### What?
Custom cache handler doesn't work on Windows
### Why?
It broke in a recent fix, when adding ESM support - #59863. The problem
is not new - dynamic imports consider an absolute path in Windows as a
protocol:
`ERR! Error [ERR_UNSUPPORTED_ESM_URL_SCHEME]: Only URLs with a scheme
in: file, data are supported by the default ESM loader. On Windows,
absolute paths must be valid file:// URLs. Received protocol 'C:'`
### How?
As a solution, it is necessary to explicitly indicate that it is indeed
an absolute path, for example by adding a / at the beginning, but the
most reliable way is to use pathToFileURL.
Since the logic is repeated in 4 places - I created a common function.
Fixes#58509
---------
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?
This PR refactors organization for the rust side packages to build
`next-swc`.
### Why?
We had some historical legacy around package structures, have ambiguous
name for `core` / `next-core`. One contains swc transform visitor for
the next.js, and the other one is new for turbopack's core next.js
features. In addition to that, there was a package dependency chain
prevents to use `core` in the turobpack / next-swc both, so each time
porting a transformer into turbopack it requires to extract new
dependency to be imported in the both place.
PR touches its organization - while PR is large to touch various files,
the crux is summarized at
2cedd06ea5
:
1. `core` becomes `next-custom-transforms`, also this becomes an
agnostic pkg can be imported in turbopack / wasm / next-swc
2. simplify dependency chain to import next-custom-transforms, organized
as below
```mermaid
flowchart TD
C(next-custom-transforms) --> A(napi)
C(next-custom-transforms) --> B(wasm)
D(next-core) --> A(napi)
E(next-build) --> A(napi)
F(next-api) --> A(napi)
C(next-custom-transforms) --> D
D(next-core) --> F(next-api)
D(next-core) --> E(next-build)
```
`impl CustomTransformer` for the each transform still lives in
`next-core`, so turbopack specific dependency is isolated under
`next-core/build/api`.
Closes PACK-2201
Closes PACK-2202
---------
Co-authored-by: hrmny <8845940+ForsakenHarmony@users.noreply.github.com>
### What?
Previously, if an error such as the client side rendering bailout (not
to be confused with the static rendering bailout which PPR supercedes)
occurs during render, and the `postpone` function was invoked during the
original render, then the `staticGenerationStore` would incorrectly
report that the render did call `postpone`, because the value is not
reset on the render for the error page.
### How?
Returning no error when the standard render is used and returning the
error when the error render was used ensures that we don't warn about
missing postpone data when a client side rendering bailout occurs.
### Looking Ahead
A refactor of the `AsyncLocalStorage` should be done such that the
stores are:
1. Returned by the calling function so we aren't reaching into store
properties at different parts
2. Reorganizing the stores so that they're tied to the invocation
lifetime, not the entire request lifetime, so that operations (like
postpone) should only be available during renders that support postpone,
not all renders during a request.
Closes NEXT-1927
The original motivation of this PR is to get `unstable_cache` into a
state where I can more easily change the implementation of postpone to
be more akin to "dynamic rendering APIs". the existing approach made
typing the staticGenerationStore in a way I wanted to for the planned
changes would have been hard to implement with the current approach. At
the same time this was an opportunity to make the implementation more
efficient and easier to reason about.
reorganizes unstable_cache to improve performance and potentially fix
latent bugs related to nest cache calls
In the original implementation there are repeated defined checks for the
store and relatively complex logic around gathering the cache entry. In
my refactor I fork the implementation based on whether we have a store
or not. Loosely this translates to whether the cache call is for App
Router vs Pages Router however due to a quirk in how we scope inner
cache calls there is an existing and unchanged case where a Pages Router
cached callback runs with a "fake" store that is used to scope some
cache values to prevent inner caching when one cached function calls
another. It should be noted that this fake store technique means that
inner cache calls inside Pages Router will hit the App Router pathway in
unstable cache. This is not great but it is the current behavior and
while I have made some changes that might fix some bugs changing this
felt like a much bigger lift to do in a primarily refactor PR.
This "fake" store can be replaced by a different async store for Pages
Router which we can use to scope the inner environment to not be cached
eventually though it may make more sense to just generalize the
staticGenerationStore into a kind of RenderStore and have it run for
Pages Router too.
I moved as much computation that can be done in the closure around the
cached function out of the cached function and I narrowed the scope of
the run call to make it clear that we really only need to scope the
callback.
I removed function allocations per invocation
I probably fixed a bug in how the revalidate property was refined on the
static generation store. Previously it would be possible to go from
number to false and back again but this doesn't make sense as false is
more like INFINITY in terms of refining to shorter values. This PR
updates this logic to be apparently
Closes NEXT-2028
### What?
When accessing `params` on a `RootLayout`, while also using parallel
routes, two potential errors would occur:
- A `Warning: React.createElement: type is invalid` error when
attempting to render a `NotFound` component that doesn't exist
- A `TypeError: Cannot read properties of undefined` error when
attempting to access params in the root layout.
### Why?
`createComponentTree` will render a duplicate `RootLayout` (to ensure
the `notFound()` fallback in unmatched parallel slots have a
`NotFoundBoundary` to catch them) but it currently doesn't ensure a
`NotFound` component exists nor does it forward `params` to the layout.
### How?
This forwards the params to the `RootLayout` and doesn't render a
`NotFoundComponent` if one doesn't exist. This replaces a few `any`
types with more sound types that would have helped catch these mistakes.
There's still a lot more typing that needs to be done (left a comment
below with some additional details) but I opted to make the minimal
changes related to this issue.
Longer term we should remove this duplicate `RootLayout` (see #60220)
which will require special UI to show unmatched slots (similar to the
error overlay, but less harsh)
Closes NEXT-1909
Fixes#59711
When you have a gaint code base of next.js app, the output client side
loaded js bundle size could be large since most of them are functional,
it might not make sense to display yellow or red color to warn you that
your bundle is too large since they conatin the basic functionality.
We display the previous colored ones with opinionless bold white color
to highlight them
Closes NEXT-2017
Closes NEXT-2015
This includes the list of changed modules in the `client-hmr-latency`
event for changes in app router pages as well as when using Turbopack.
For Turbopack, this list is derived from the data structure included in
the `turbopack-message` event. Each of these is originally a module id,
which includes additional context information. For analytics purposes
this is removed (and could maybe surfaced in the future once the webpack
data is also normalized).
Closes PACK-2167
### What?
When running a
[multi-zone](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/tree/canary/examples/with-zones)
app in dev, guest app pages would infinitely reload if you change the
basePath of the host app to the default one (omit basePath settings in
next.config.js) (empty string `""` as per Next.js docs).
### Why?
The HMR upgrade request would fail and get caught into a retry loop. In
the multi-zone case, they fail because the upgrade request would be sent
again for a request that had already been upgraded. This resulted in a
"server.handleUpgrade() was called more than once with the same socket"
error, causing the upgrade request to fail.
Every time a retry occurred, the page would trigger a full refresh since
certain HMR errors cause the browser to reload.
### How?
This ensures the upgrade handler only responds to requests that match
the configured basePath (considering when there is no basePath). Default
basePath for Next.js applications it's an empty string `""`.
Ref: https://nextjs.org/docs/app/api-reference/next-config-js/basePath
Other fixes & updates related to the bug:
- Updated test apps to avoid having issues regarding client & server
mismatch for dates
- Added default use case in e2e tests, where you have a default Next.js
application where the basePath it's the default one and a guest app that
it's being routed by the main one through Next.js rewrites.
Closes NEXT-1797
Fixes#59161Fixes#56615Fixes#54454
---------
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
Per @styfle suggestion, #58038 has been split into multiple PRs for
easier review.
- Remove `chalk` inside `@next/react-dev-overlay`
- `@next/react-dev-overlay` is bundled with Next.js. The usage of
`chalk` inside `@next/react-dev-overlay` was not removed in
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/55992, thus the `chalk` is still
being shipped.
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
Per @styfle suggestion, #58038 has been split into multiple PRs for
easier review.
- Re-add precompile `watchpack`
- Next.js has stopped bundling the `watchpack` since
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/50792. Currently, `watchpack` is
a direct dependency of Next.js. The PR adds the pre-compile back.
Co-authored-by: Steven <steven@ceriously.com>
Per @styfle suggestion, #58038 has been split into multiple PRs for
easier review.
- Remove `find-cache-dir`
- The usage of `find-cache-dir` was removed **4 years ago**
(https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/7013) but the dist and the build
script were never removed.
- Remove `@segment/ajv-human-errors`
- The usage of `@segment/ajv-human-errors` was removed in
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/56383 by me. Though the build
script was also removed in that PR, the dist never got removed.
Per @styfle suggestion, #58038 has been split into multiple PRs for
easier review.
- Enable minification of `@next/font`
- Currently, the `@next/font` is built separately (without minification)
and then copied to the `dist` folder of the Next.js.
### What
Fix bad detection of dynamic route of sitemap metadata route, the swc
AST check should process when the text are detected. But prevuious if
there's text with `generateSitemap` such as comment but not the actual
export it will fail.
### How
Add both checks on metadata loader side and detection helper side
* Only call `generateSitemaps` helper when the export existed
* Fix the helper detection logic (major part of this PR)
Fixes#59698Closes#60344
Closes NEXT-2007
### What?
Our
[docs](https://nextjs.org/docs/app/building-your-application/routing/parallel-routes#convention)
point out that `app/page.js` is equivalent to `app/@children/page.js`,
however in practice this is not the case, and causes type errors when
using `@children` slots as well as incorrect behavior when matching
catch-all routes.
### Why?
- When typechecking, `@children` slots would be added to the typeguard
file for the associated layout, resulting in duplicate identifiers for
the `children` prop
- When determining where to insert catchall slots, the `hasMatchedSlots`
check wasn't considering that the `@children` slot corresponds with the
page component, so matching another page would clobber the previous one.
### How?
- Filters out the `@children` slot when collecting slots for
typechecking
- Filters out the `@children` slot when running the `hasMatchedSlots`
function in the catch-all normalizer
Closes NEXT-1984
### Fixing a bug
I'm sorry, I have no idea how I managed to delete this, as I just copied
the code.
However, I had to figure out why the tests passed. When I test the
running application locally, it works as expected.
So, when a route is first used in a running production application in a
test, `ctx.fetchCache` is `undefined`. Therefore, the error rule does
not trigger on the first request, and the cache is successfully written.
This may result in artifacts in FetchCache in Vercel and possibly in
other parts of the code.
```ts
if (
ctx.fetchCache && // <- Undefined on first request
// we don't show this error/warning when a custom cache handler is being used
// as it might not have this limit
!this.hasCustomCacheHandler &&
JSON.stringify(data).length > 2 * 1024 * 1024
) {
if (this.dev) {
throw new Error(`fetch for over 2MB of data can not be cached`)
}
return
}
```
I'm 95% sure that this is a bug and it shouldn't work like this. I'll
look into this later and if there is an error, I'll put it into a task
and try to figure it out later.
Unfortunately, the
[test](7e028fb6d8/test/e2e/app-dir/app-static/app-static.test.ts (L3080))
from [previous PR](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/59976) is not
working yet, although it is correct from my point of view. I think it
should be kept and the problem above should be fixed.
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What?
When relying on a `default` route as a fallback, greedier catch-all
segments in the application hierarchy would take precedence, causing
unexpected errors/matching behavior.
### Why?
When performing parallel route catch-all normalization, we push
potential catch-all matches to paths without considering that a path
might instead be matched by a `default` page. Because of this, the
catch-all take precedence and the app will not try and load the default.
For example, given this structure:
```
{
"/": ["/page"],
"/[[...catchAll]]": ["/[[...catchAll]]/page"],
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]": ["/nested/[foo]/[bar]/@slot/page"],
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]/[baz]": ["/nested/[foo]/[bar]/@slot/[baz]/page"],
}
```
(Where there's a `/nested/[foo]/[bar]/default.tsx`)
The route normalization logic would produce:
```
{
"/": ["/page"],
"/[[...catchAll]]": ["/[[...catchAll]]/page"],
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]": [
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]/@slot/page",
"/[[...catchAll]]/page",
],
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]/[baz]": [
"/nested/[foo]/[bar]/@slot/[baz]/page",
"/[[...catchAll]]/page",
],
}
```
This means that when building the `LoaderTree`, it won't ever try to
find the default for that segment. **This solution operates under the
assumption that if you defined a `default` at a particular layout
segment, you intend for that to render in place of a greedier
catch-all.** (Let me know if this is an incorrect assumption)
### How?
We can't safely normalize catch-all parallel routes without having
context about where the `default` segments are, so this updates
`appPaths` to be inclusive of default segments and then filters them
when doing anything relating to build/export to maintain existing
behavior. We use this information to check if an existing default exists
at the same segment level that we'd push the catch-all to. If one
exists, we don't push the catch-all. Otherwise we proceed as normal.
Closes NEXT-1987
### What?
Turbopack does not apply same transform for the react server components,
which makes missing lot of compilation error validation and custom
comments. PR refactors transform to be used in next-swc / turbopack
both, then apply it into turbopack.
There are still some of test cases are not passing, might need further
digging for the transform condition.
Closes PACK-2155
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Neutkens <tim@timneutkens.nl>
This fixes a case in the PPR navigations implementation where page data
was not being applied.
During a navigation, we compare the route trees of the old and new pages
to determine which layouts are shared. If the segment keys of two
layouts are the same, they are reused.
However, the server doesn't bother to assign segment keys to the leaf
segments (which we refer to as "page" segments) because they are never
part of a shared layout. It assigns all of them a special constant
(`__PAGE__`).
In the PPR implementation, I overlooked this and compared the segment
keys of all segments, including pages, not just shared layouts. So if
the only thing that changed during a navigation was the page data, and
not any parent layout, the client would fail to apply the navigation.
The fix is to add a special case for page segments before comparing
nested layouts. I also moved an existing special case for default pages,
since those are also leaf segments and are conceptually similar.
### Fixing a bug
### What?
Disable 2MB limit for custom incrementalCacheHandler
### Why?
The limit is necessary because `FetchCache` has a 2MB limit, but it
seems there was a miscommunication regarding the key coincidence, where
`fetchCache` is a flag indicating that the method is called from fetch,
rather than indicating that the `FetchCache` Provider is currently being
used.
We do not use Vercel, and as I understand it, we do not have the
opportunity to use this functionality.
In any case, it is more important for us to increase the limits, and in
some cases, using a file storage is even preferable.
### How?
I have created a flag that determines whether the use of `FetchCache` is
possible at least in theory - if no custom provider is passed, and
additionally configured it so that it is not an implementation of
`FetchCache` as a protection against special individuals (*like me :)*).
If everything is fine, I will write proper tests.
Also, I would like to recommend making `FileSystemCache` public (_i.e.
support it as public functionality_) so that it can be imported and
extended or simply used to fix only it.
Fixes#48324 (partially)
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
Fixes#57038
# What?
Added an error message when `generateStaticParams` returns an empty
array with `output:export`.
# Why?
To provide developers with clear feedback when `generateStaticParams` is
not used correctly.
# How?
Modified the condition checks around the use of `generateStaticParams`
to include a check for an empty array and added a corresponding error
message.
---------
Co-authored-by: Steven <steven@ceriously.com>
### What & Why?
When visiting a route that attempts to render a slot with no page & no default, the fallback behavior is to trigger a 404. However this can lead to a confusing development experience for complex parallel routing cases as you might not realize a default is missing, or which slot is causing the error.
Previous issues where this caused confusion:
- https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/51805
- https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/49569
### How?
This is a dev-only modification to track parallel slots that are using the default fallback (aka missing). When the `NotFoundBoundary` is triggered in development mode, this will log a warning about why it 404ed, along with a list of slot(s) that were determined to be missing.
### Future
We should eventually lift this into some sort of dev-only UI to help catch it when not monitoring the browser console (similar to the error overlay). However, this will require some design thought and isn't necessary for the first iteration.
Closes NEXT-1798
## What?
Currently there is a bug in Server Actions when you `fetch` as it uses
the same defaults (caching when not specified) as rendering, this causes
some issues as you want to read your writes in Server Actions.
This change adds the `no-store` default for Server Actions, you can
still override it by specifying `cache: 'force-cache'` for example, but
it defaults to `cache: 'no-store'`.
Fixes NEXT-1926
<!-- 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 #
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
### What?
get value, issues and diagnostics in a single strongly consistent call
### Why?
Before issues and diagnostics where not received strongly consistent,
which could result in stale data.
### How?
Closes PACK-2194
In fact, this is an issue that has been solved in #52033, but it seems
#52492 introduced it again.
> During development, for fonts created via next/font the file path is
already containing the hash so we can always have them cached. This
fixes the problem of fonts causing FOUC in HMR.
Fixes#50782
---------
Co-authored-by: Tim Neutkens <tim@timneutkens.nl>
Had some spare time and was trying to get more familiar with the
codebase.
Added a few types to `create-next-app` here. Nothing fancy!
---------
Co-authored-by: Steven <steven@ceriously.com>
This commit updates some of the code organization in app-render in
preparation for supporting dynamic RSC repsonses on top of static SSR
responses for PPR. The main change to notice is the separation of
creating the server component renderer which initiates the RSC render
and executes in the RSC layer with the consuming component which lives
in the SSR layer. By organizing the code this way we can later only call
the server render in certain cases, omitting the SSR render entirely.
This is different than just using the generaetFlight pathway because
that pathway serves client navs and does not actually render the same
output that the intial render does.
Closes NEXT-1889
Previously in #58967 we set all the module type as `'es6'` to let swc
parse app router code as ESM and output as ESM due to the incorrect
detection of CJS module by auto-cjs plugin, but this is not accurate
when the external library bundle is CJS. The problem is when swc
compiling modern syntax for example private properties in CJS bundle but
emitted the swc helpers with ESM imports.
We had a auto-cjs swc plugin to determine if the file is using CJS or
not, @kdy1 fixed the bug of it so now we can use the default module
type, and let the plugin to determine its module type, to make sure
we're emitting the right helpers.
Closes NEXT-1942
Based on #60118
Use dynamic import instead of require to load the incremental cache
handled, so when using ESM it will still work.
Updated the tests and merged them into new test suite, include 3 cases
of custom cache definition:
- CJS with `module.exports`
- CJS with `exports.default` with ESM mark
- ESM with `export default`
Closes NEXT-1924
Fixes#58509
The start line of build logging `Creating an optimized production build
...` was logged by spinner, and when all build is finished we stop that
spinner. But the problem is all the logs from a page such as warnings
will be also leaded by it since they interrupted the spinner.
We changed the spinner to a one-line log now that will make the warning
logs more clear and let the page-level build logs print without messed
with app-level build logs.
#### After
```
▲ Next.js 14.0.5-canary.34
Creating an optimized production build ...
⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `runtime` field in "/Users/huozhi/workspace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/app/expo
rt/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal.
The default runtime will be used instead.
⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `preferredRegion` field in "/Users/huozhi/workspace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/
app/export/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal or an array of string literals.
The default runtime will be used instead.
```
#### Before
```
▲ Next.js 14.0.5-canary.34
Creating an optimized production build ... ⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `runtime` field in "/Users/huozhi/worksp
ace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/app/export/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal.
The default runtime will be used instead.
⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `preferredRegion` field in "/Users/huozhi/workspace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/
app/export/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal or an array of string literals.
The default runtime will be used instead.
Creating an optimized production build ... ⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `runtime` field in "/Users/huozhi/worksp
ace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/app/export/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal.
The default runtime will be used instead.
⚠ Next.js can't recognize the exported `preferredRegion` field in "/Users/huozhi/workspace/next.js/test/e2e/app-dir/app-edge/
app/export/inherit/page.tsx" as it was not assigned to a string literal or an array of string literals.
The default runtime will be used instead.
```
Closes NEXT-1939
Closes NEXT-1947
### What?
Next.js throws a hard `SEGMENT MISMATCH` error when the reducers were
unable to apply the a patch to the router tree from the server response.
### How?
Rather than crashing the router, this will treat segment mismatches as a
MPA navigation, to restore the client router into a working state.
### Test Plan
If there are specific scenarios where Next.js throws this error, it
should most likely be fixed in Next and not in user-land. Since it's not
currently obvious what scenarios will trigger this error, this PR serves
to recover from a mismatch more gracefully and provides some debug
information rather than crashing the application. As such, there's no
easy way to create an E2E test for this and I've instead opted for a
simple unit test.
Closes NEXT-1878
[slack
x-ref](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C017QMYC5FB/p1704214439768469)
[slack
x-ref](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03KAR5DCKC/p1702565978694519)
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
### What?
Make `auto-cjs` pass consider shadowing of `module`, so it can ignore
`module.exports = foo` in nested scopes.
### Why?
It's problematic for many tasks
### How?
Closes PACK-2074
## What?
Always call `createPagesMapping` as it already handles the case when
there are no paths.
Also introduces `PAGE_TYPES` to have a single source of truth for these
types and where they're used. As you can see this replaces a ton of
hardcoded `'app'`, `'pages'`, and `'root'` references.
<!-- 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-1935
## What?
While working on some other refactors I noticed that this check for
duplicate routes is incorrect.
Upon further investigation with @feedthejim we noticed that this check
can be removed altogether as it's already being checked correctly in the
route matcher.
I've moved the test to use `createNextDescribe` and removed the check
for build because it's a dev-only warning.
<!-- 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-1941
## What?
While looking at other refactors I noticed that `entrypoint.name ===
'root'` was checked which is surprising as `root` is not any of the
injected entrypoints.
Also noticed that there's a `root` parameter that refers to the very
first name of App Router, which was the `root` directory instead of
`app` directory. That variable could be removed as it's in scope above.
<!-- 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-1938
## What?
While looking into some refactors for `next build` I noticed that
`NextBuildContext` was used to propagate if instrumentation.js exists or
not, however that information can be inferred by checking if the
entrypoint exists in the compiler. Applied that change.
I've updated the test fixtures to include the `next.config.js` so that
you can run them using `pnpm next`.
<!-- 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-1931
## What
When users specify `"type": "module"` in Next.js app, especially with
`create-next-app`, `Image` component is not working. An error
`Unsupported Server Component type: {...}` is thrown.
## Why
`next/image` API is mixing with a client component as default export and
a named export as server component. But the entry file of the API is
still CJS file, which will import the module as the object. So you'll
get `{ default, unstable_getImageProps }` when you do `import Image from
'next/image'` instead of `Image` component itself, where the CJS module
load all the exports as an object. This is expected behavior for ESM but
breaks the usage.
It only errors when you're using js extensions, if you're using
typescript, it still works. If you're using turbopack, it works in dev
mode.
This is also because webpack can't analyze the exports from CJS module
of that `next/image` entry file. Usually we can assign the default
export to the module itself, then attach other named exports onto it, so
the default export equals the `module.exports` itself. But for
`next/image` since the default export is an client component, doing that
will error with React as you cannot modify the react client reference.
Turbopack doesn't use the same way to analyze the default export, so it
doesn't have this problem.
## How
We create few ESM version of entry files of nextjs APIs, then pick up
them to let app router for bundling, instead of using the `next/<api
name>.js` CJS files. Those ESM entries still point to the `next/dist/..`
CJS files. In this way webpack and directly gets the exports from the
`next/dist/...` files and be aware of the module exports. No more CJS
module wrapping the ESM module, the default and named exports can
preserve correctly.
Fixes#54777
Closes NEXT-1774
Closes NEXT-1879
Closes NEXT-1923
### What?
When handling route interception in two different segments but handled
by the same interception route, the first interception will show the
correct component but attempting the same interception on another
segment will return elements from the first request, not the second.
### Why?
Prefetch cache entries are created from the browser URL. However, route
interception makes use of `nextUrl` to mask the underlying components
that are being fetched from the server to handle the request
Consider the following scenario:
```
app
foo
@modal
(...)post
[id]
bar
@modal
(...post)
[id]
post
[id]
```
If you trigger an interception on `/foo`, your URL is going to be masked
to `/post/1` and keyed as such in the prefetch cache. However, the cache
entry is actually associated with `app/foo/@modal/(...post)/[id]`. That
means when you trigger the same interception on `/bar`, it will return
the tree from `/foo`.
### How?
This PR will prefix the prefetch cache key with `state.nextUrl` when
necessary.
Fixes#49878Fixes#52748
Closes NEXT-1818
### What?
Catch-all routes are being matched to parallel routes which causes
issues like an interception route being handled by the wrong page
component, or a page component being associated with multiple pages
resulting in a "You cannot have two parallel pages that resolve to the
same path" build error.
### Why?
#58215 fixed a bug that caused catchall paths to not properly match when
used with parallel routes. In other words, a catchall slot wouldn't
render on a page that could match that catch all. Or a catchall page
wouldn't match a slot. At build time, a normalization step was
introduced to take application paths and attempt to perform this
matching behavior.
However in it's current form, this causes the errors mentioned above to
manifest. To better illustrate the problem, here are a few examples:
Given:
```
{
'/': [ '/page' ],
'/[...slug]': [ '/[...slug]/page' ],
'/items/[...ids]': [ '/items/[...ids]/page' ],
'/(.)items/[...ids]': [ '/@modal/(.)items/[...ids]/page' ]
}
```
The normalization logic would produce:
```
{
'/': [ '/page' ],
'/[...slug]': [ '/[...slug]/page' ],
'/items/[...ids]': [ '/items/[...ids]/page' ],
'/(.)items/[...ids]': [ '/@modal/(.)items/[...ids]/page', '/[...slug]/page' ]
}
```
The interception route will now be improperly handled by
`[...slug]/page` rather than the interception handler.
Another example, which rather than incorrectly handling a match, will
produce a build error:
Given:
```
{
'/': [ '/(group-b)/page' ],
'/[...catcher]': [ '/(group-a)/@parallel/[...catcher]/page' ]
}
```
The normalization logic would produce:
```
{
'/': [ '/(group-b)/page', '/(group-a)/@parallel/[...catcher]/page' ],
'/[...catcher]': [ '/(group-a)/@parallel/[...catcher]/page' ]
}
```
The parallel catch-all slot is now part of `/`. This means when building
the loader tree, two `children` parallel segments (aka page components)
will be found when hitting `/`, which is an error.
The error that was added here was originally intended to help catch
scenarios like:
`/app/(group-a)/page` and `/app/(group-b)/page`. However it also throws
for parallel slots, which isn't necessarily an error (especially since
the normalization logic will push potential matches).
### How?
There are two small fixes in this PR, the rest are an abundance of e2e
tests to help prevent regressions.
- When normalizing catch-all routes, we will not attempt to push any
page entrypoints for interception routes. These should already have all
the information they need in `appPaths`.
- Before throwing the error about duplicate page segments in
`next-app-loader`, we check to see if it's because we already matched a
page component but we also detected a parallel slot that would have
matched the page slot. In this case, we don't error, since the app can
recover from this.
- Loading a client reference manifest shouldn't throw a cryptic require
error. `loadClientReferenceManifest` is already potentially returning
undefined, so this case should already be handled gracefully
Separately, we'll need to follow-up on the Turbopack side to:
- Make sure the duplicate matching matches the Webpack implementation (I
believe Webpack is sorting, but Turbopack isn't)
- Implement #58215 in Turbopack. Once this is done, we should expect the
tests added in this PR to start failing.
Fixes#58272Fixes#58660Fixes#58312Fixes#59782Fixes#59784
Closes NEXT-1809
Adds a regression test and a fix for a bug that sometimes happens when a
prefetched route on the client becomes stale — the app would get stuck
in a loading state.
The problem was the condition I used to fallback to the non-PPR
implementation, inside navigateReducer. It was too narrow, causing
prefetched segments that contained dynamic holes to sometimes be treated
as if they were complete. The net effect was that the dynamic data would
never stream in, and the page would get stuck in a fallback state until
the stale prefetch was eventually purged from the cache, or the user
refreshed the page.
The reason the mistake happened was, as an incremental step, I decided
to fallback to the non-PPR implementation for any case where I hadn't
yet implemented the equivalent functionality. I think still think this
is a good strategy, despite the mistake, but I'm eager to get everything
migrated to the new model as soon as possible.
Closes NEXT-1920
We already have variables of swc loaders for different bundling layers,
the composed one should just be loaders instead of being called "swc
loader"
Closes NEXT-1917
If a user accidentally configures a non-valid `revalidate` value this
ensures we show a proper error message instead of silently tolerating
it.
Closes: NEXT-1896
Closes NEXT-1915
For a more detailed explanation of the algorithm, refer to the comments
in ppr-navigations.ts. Below is a high-level overview.
### Step 1: Render the prefetched data immediately
Immediately upon navigation, we construct a new Cache Node tree (i.e.
copy-on-write) that represents the optimistic result of a navigation,
using both the current Cache Node tree and data that was prefetched
prior to navigation.
At this point, we haven't yet received the navigation response from the
server. It could send back something completely different from the tree
that was prefetched — due to rewrites, default routes, parallel routes,
etc.
But in most cases, it will return the same tree that we prefetched, just
with the dynamic holes filled in. So we optimistically assume this will
happen, and accept that the real result could be arbitrarily different.
We'll reuse anything that was already in the previous tree, since that's
what the server does.
New segments (ones that don't appear in the old tree) are assigned an
unresolved promise. The data for these promises will be fulfilled later,
when the navigation response is received.
The tree can be rendered immediately after it is created. Any new trees
that do not have prefetch data will suspend during rendering, until the
dynamic data streams in.
### Step 2: Fill in the dynamic data as it streams in
When the dynamic data is received from the server, we can start filling
in the unresolved promises in the tree. All the pending promises that
were spawned by the navigation will be resolved, either with dynamic
data from the server, or `null` to indicate that the data is missing.
A `null` value will trigger a lazy fetch during render, which will then
patch up the tree using the same mechanism as the non-PPR implementation
(serverPatchReducer).
Usually, the server will respond with exactly the subset of data that
we're waiting for — everything below the nearest shared layout. But
technically, the server can return anything it wants.
This does _not_ create a new tree; it modifies the existing one in
place. Which means it must follow the Suspense rules of cache safety.
## To Do
Not all necessarily PR-blocking, since the status quo is that
navigations don't work at all when PPR is enabled
- [x] Figure out how to handle dynamic metadata. Need to switch from
prefetched metadata to final.
- [x] Some mistake related to parallel routes, need to look into failing
tests
Closes NEXT-1894
### What?
Navigating to a layout that is part of a route group that uses route
interception currently will trigger a 404 error if the route group
doesn't define a `default` segment.
### Why?
When `next-app-loader` injects fallback defaults into the loader tree,
it does so by first seeing if a default already exists. However it does
this without ignoring route groups, meaning if you have a
`/app/default.tsx` and your interception route is at
`/app/(level1)/(level2)`, it will look for the default at
`/app/(level1)/(level2)/default.tsx`.
When a `default` isn't found, the fallback behavior is to trigger a
`notFound()` error. This means navigating to the intercepting route that
has no `default` for the `children` segment will 404.
### How?
This adjusts the fallback behavior by attempting to find the `default`
by normalizing the segment path, which will ignore route groups. That
way `/app/(level1)/(level2)/default` will first check `/app/default.tsx`
before falling back to `notFound` behavior.
Fixes#59279
Closes NEXT-1813
If the data for a segment is missing when LayoutRouter renders, it
initiates a lazy fetch to patch the cache. This is how all dynamic data
fetching works in the pre-PPR implementation.
For PPR, we won't use this mechanism anymore for regular navigations,
but (at least for now) we will still use it as a fallback behavior if
the server response does not match what we expected to receive.
This commit adds support for asynchronously triggering a lazy fetch, by
unwrapping the segment data promise inside LayoutRouter to check if it's
missing. If so, it will trigger the lazy fetch mechanism.
When PPR is not enabled this should not observably impact behavior.
Closes NEXT-1893
When uploading traces from `.next/trace`, target paths that trigger
compilations were being normalized to paths like
`[project]/../../../../../middleware`. This PR removes the normalization
logic so that the triggers appear as `/middleware` which is easier to
understand.
## What?
Moves the changeSubscription for _document into the finally block,
similar to how the page itself is handled there as well.
This should allow moving the rest of the try block into a separate
function that can be reused for builds too.
<!-- 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-1885
## What?
I'm working on consolidating a bunch of the file writing related pieces
in the Turbopack handling in the dev server so that it can be abstracted
out as it's needed for `next build` too.
These changes make sure that there is a single `writeManifests()`
instead of picking specific manifests to write.
We can optimize this later but for now the overhead of writing them to
disk separately is negligible.
<!-- 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-1884
### What?
There are a bunch of different bugs caused by the same underlying issue,
but the common thread is that performing any sort of router cache update
(either through `router.refresh()`, `revalidatePath()`, or `redirect()`)
inside of a parallel route would break the router preventing subsequent
actions, and not resolve any pending state such as from `useFormState`.
### Why?
`applyPatch` is responsible for taking an update response from the
server and merging it into the client router cache. However, there's
specific bailout logic to skip over applying the patch to a
`__DEFAULT__` segment (which corresponds with a `default.tsx` page).
When the router detects a cache node that is expected to be rendered on
the page but contains no data, the router will trigger a lazy fetch to
retrieve the data that's expected to be there
([ref](5adacb6912/packages/next/src/client/components/layout-router.tsx (L359-L370)))
and then update the router cache once the data resolves
([ref](5adacb6912/packages/next/src/client/components/layout-router.tsx (L399-L404))).
This is causing the router to get stuck in a loop: it'll fetch the data
for the cache node, send the data to the router reducer to merge it into
the existing cache nodes, skip merging that data in for `__DEFAULT__`
segments, and repeat.
### How?
We currently assign `__DEFAULT__` to have `notFound()` behavior when
there isn't a `default.tsx` component for a particular segment. This
makes it so that when loading a page that renders a slot without slot
content / a `default`, it 404s. But when performing a client-side
navigation, the intended behavior is different: we keep whatever was in
the `default` slots place, until the user refreshes the page, which
would then 404.
However, this logic is incorrect when triggering any of the above
mentioned cache node revalidation strategies: if we always skip applying
to the `__DEFAULT__` segment, slots will never properly handle reducer
actions that rely on making changes to their cache nodes.
This splits these different `applyPatch` functions: one that will apply
to the full tree, and another that'll apply to everything except the
default segments with the existing bailout condition.
Fixes#54173Fixes#58772Fixes#54723Fixes#57665
Closes NEXT-1706
Closes NEXT-1815
Closes NEXT-1812
## What?
Ensures `Object.entries` is not called on the `Map`. Seems this only
fails in a very particular case but potentially this fixes other issues
than the one I added in the tests too.
## How?
`Object.entries()` results in an empty array when called on a `Map`.
Created a shared type declaration for the value and removed the
`Object.entries`. Benefit of this is that we can skip the loop as well.
<!-- 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 #
-->
## What?
Small refactor to move Turbopack hotreloader interface creation to a
separate function: `createHotReloaderTurbopack`.
Renamed `HotReloader` to `HotReloaderWebpack`.
Initially wanted to move `createHotReloaderTurbopack` to a separate file
but it relies on a bunch of in-scope variables so that is not
straightforward. Will do that later.
<!-- 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-1881
This fixes some of headers (and adds associated tests) for pages when
PPR is enabled. Namely, the `Cache-Control` headers are now returning
correctly, reflecting the non-cachability of some requests:
- Requests that postpone (dynamic data is streamed after the initial
static shell is streamed)
- Requests for the Dynamic RSC payload
Additionally, the `X-NextJS-Cache` header has been updated for better
support for PPR:
- Requests that postpone no longer return this header as it doesn't
reflect the cache state of the request (because it streams)
- Requests for the Prefetch RSC now returns the correct cache headers
depending on the segment and pre-postpone state
This also enables the other pathnames in the test suites 🙌🏻
Closes NEXT-1840
## What?
Fixes a bug where `useOptimistic` wouldn't trigger a compiler error when
imported in Server Components.
Adds tests for the following `import { x } from 'react'` in Server
Components, where `x` is the value:
- Component
- createContext
- createFactory
- PureComponent
- useDeferredValue
- useEffect
- useImperativeHandle
- useInsertionEffect
- useLayoutEffect
- useReducer
- useRef
- useState
- useSyncExternalStore
- useTransition
- useOptimistic
These show a particular error explaining how to add `"use client"`:
<!-- Thanks for opening a PR! Your contribution is much appreciated.i:
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 #
-->
When PPR is enabled, the CacheNodeSeedData and FlightRouterState
contained in an RSC payload (whether it's static or dynamic) should
always have the same tree structure.
The only reason the two trees would ever be different is if the server
partially renders with `loading.tsx`, but that behavior doesn't exist
when PPR is enabled. (In that case, the CacheNodeSeedData would describe
only a subset of FlightRouterState.)
The behavior is already correct but to make the types a bit closer, this
changes the `parallelRoutes` slot of CacheNodeSeedData to be
non-nullable; if there are no children, it should be an empty object.
It's not semantically important, I'm only changing it to make the types
more consistent, since we typically traverse both trees in parallel.
Eventually we will probably merge these into a single transport type.
Closes NEXT-1868
The PPR implementation of navigateReducer is expected to diverge
significantly from the existing, non-PPR implementation. So this forks
them into two separate functions. This will be easier to maintain than
two different implementations inside the same function, especially
considering we don't expect any more changes to the non-PPR
implementation.
This also reduces the chances we'll introduce an accidental regression
into the non-PPR version, which is the stable one that all users (except
for the ones dogfooding PPR) are currently using.
For now, the two implementations are identical. I'll start making
changes in subsequent PRs.
Only one implementation will be included in the final build; the other
one will be dead code eliminated because the feature check is statically
inlined at build time:
```js
export const navigateReducer = process.env.__NEXT_PPR
? navigateReducer_PPR
: navigateReducer_noPPR
```
Closes NEXT-1856
This ensures that `export const dynamic = 'force-static'` is properly
honored when a page contains fetches with `cache: 'no-store'`, `cache:
'no-cache'` or `next: { revalidate: 0 }`.
Closes NEXT-1858
Implementation of feature request opened here -
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/discussions/59427
Approach:
~~We are using micromatch in the csrf protection step of actionHandler
to allow for wildcard domains passed in allowedDomains. This is the same
library used for matching domains for remote images.~~
If any of the allowed domains match the origin of the request, we skip
the downstream error thrown for csrf protection.
Edit:
Micromatch is not available in this context as it is only compatible
with Node. This codepath can be run from the edge, so we need to rely on
vanilla js compatible code only.
Instead of falling back to allowing the user to pass in a regex, which
can be somewhat insecure, we opt into continuing to use a wildcard
pattern from a configuration standpoint and instead use a simple
function that matches on wildcards using string comparison and
iteration.
Ideally, Micromatch can be retrofitted to work in non-Node settings and
this piece of code can be replaced in the future, without deprecating or
changing the next.config interface.
---------
Co-authored-by: Josh Story <story@hey.com>
Adds a new field `prefetchRsc` to CacheNode that will be used by the PPR
implementation. It represents a static version of the segment that can
be showed immediately, and may or may not contain dynamic holes. It's
prefetched before a navigation occurs. During rendering, we will choose
whether to render `rsc` or `prefetchRsc` with `useDeferredValue`.
As with the `rsc` field, a value of `null` means no value was provided.
In this case, the LayoutRouter will go straight to rendering the `rsc`
value; if that one is also missing, it will suspend and trigger a lazy
fetch.
The non-PPR implementation will never set this value.
This PR adds the field to the CacheNode type but doesn't implement any
of the behavior yet. Mostly this involves updating the router reducer
unit tests.
Closes NEXT-1855
Passing `NODE_OPTIONS='--inspect'` was failing because a sub-process was
getting created (`getRegistry()`) which would trigger a "address already
in use" error when the process inherited the same debugger port from the
parent process.
I had to disable this test in
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/59508 because it wasn't passing,
CI was just skipping it. This PR fixes the behavior and re-enables the
test.
Fixes#55862
Closes NEXT-1854
I want to give this field a name that's bit less generic and
distinguishes it from `lazyData` (because that one has a different type
and is a special case we want to eventually remove).
I'm also about to add an optional `prefetchRsc` field that represents a
prefetched version of the same value. The common suffix is meant to
communicate how they are related.
Doing this rename in its own PR because it's a pure find-and-replace,
whereas the later steps are not.
Closes NEXT-1846
This updates the `collectGenerateParams` method to use a loop rather
than being recursive as well as updating some of the Typescript types.
This is a follow up of #59420.
Closes NEXT-1839
`CacheNode.data` is used to lazily kick off a request during render, and
represents the result of the entire Flight response. It doesn't
correspond directly to the RSC data of the cache node itself — that's
`subTreeData`. To complicate things further, I'm about to add another
field to CacheNode that represents prefetched RSC data.
To make it a little less confusing, I've renamed the `data` field to
`lazyData`. Still not perfectly clear on first glance, but it's at least
more specific. With PPR, the goal is to remove the lazy data fetching
mechanism in favor of initiating the request immediately upon
navigation. So this field will eventually go away.
In the next PR, I will rename `subTreeData`, too. Perhaps something with
"rsc" in the name so it's less generic than "data".
Closes NEXT-1843
I'm about to make some changes to the CacheNode data structure, and
before I add more complexity, I noticed an opportunity to remove some —
the `status` field isn't logically necessary:
- The `DATA_FETCH` and `LAZY_INITIALIZED` states are already treated as
equivalent; in either case, they will cause the render to suspend during
render, trigger a lazy data fetch (if one hasn't been triggered
already), and then update the router with the result of the response.
- `subTreeData` is null if and only if the node is in the `DATA_FETCH`
or `LAZY_INITIALIZED` states, and it always causes the render to
suspend. So rather than check if the status is one of those, we can
check if `subTreeData` is null.
The most important changes are to CacheNode type in
app-router-context.shared-runtime and the lazy fetching logic in
LayoutRouter. Everything else in the diff is related to deleting the
`status` field wherever a CacheNode is referenced, like in the reducer
unit tests.
Closes NEXT-1842
Before PPR, the way instant navigations work in Next.js is we prefetch
everything up to the first route segment that defines a loading.js
boundary. The rest of the tree is defered until the actual navigation.
It does not take into account whether the data is dynamic — even if the
tree is completely static, it will still defer everything inside the
loading boundary.
The approach with PPR is different — we prefetch as deeply as possible,
and only defer when dynamic data is accessed. If so, we only defer the
nearest parent Suspense boundary of the dynamic data access, regardless
of whether the boundary is defined by loading.js or a normal <Suspense>
component in userspace.
This PR removes the partial behavior of loading.js when the PPR flag is
enabled. In effect, loading.js now acts like a regular Suspense boundary
with no additional special behavior.
Note that in practice this usually means we'll end up prefetching more
than we were before PPR, which may or may not be considered a
performance regression by some apps. The plan is to address this before
General Availability of PPR by introducing granular per-segment
fetching, so we can reuse as much of the tree as possible during both
prefetches and dynamic navigations. But during the beta period, we
should be clear about this trade off in our communications.
## Testing strategy
While I was writing a test, I noticed that it's currently pretty
difficult to test all the scenarios that PPR is designed to handle, so I
gave special attention to setting up a testing strategy that I hope will
make this easier going forward. The overall pattern is based on how
we've been testing concurrent rendering features in the React repo for
many years:
- In the e2e test, spin up an HTTP server for responding to requests
sent by the test app. This simulates the data service that would be used
in a real Next.js application, whether it's direct db access, an ORM, or
a higher-level data access layer. The e2e test can observe when
individual requests are received, and control the timing of when the
data is fulfilled, without needing to mock any lower level I/O. (We're
already using a similar pattern to [test fetch
deduping](a3616d33ed/test/e2e/app-dir/app-fetch-deduping/app-fetch-deduping.test.ts (L8-L29)).)
- Each time a request is received, write to an event log. Then assert on
the result of the log at different points throughout the test. This
helps catch subtle mistakes where the order of events is not expected,
or the same event happens more than it should.
(I wrote some test helpers, but to avoid early abstraction, I've
intentionally not moved them into a separate module.)
Closes NEXT-1779
### What?
switch turbopack to use a single client components entrypoint for all
client components on a page for development. This aligns it with the
webpack behavior.
### Why?
compiling a separate entrypoint for every client component is pretty
expensive in regards of compilation, chunking, code generation, file
writing and number of requests.
### Turbopack Changes
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/6713 <!-- Tobias Koppers - use
real emojis -->
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/6728 <!-- Tobias Koppers - fix
order of reverse topologic iteration -->
Closes PACK-2115
<!-- 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
### 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#58087
-->
fixes#58087
Currently in Next 14, everyone has fullURL flag turned to true, this PR
reverts the condition.
---------
Co-authored-by: Jiachi Liu <inbox@huozhi.im>
### What?
While scrolled on a page, and when following a link to a new page and
clicking the browser back button or using `router.back()`, the scroll
position would sometimes restore scroll to the incorrect spot (in the
case of the test added in this PR, it'd scroll you back to the top of
the list)
### Why?
The refactor in #56497 changed the way router actions are processed:
specifically, all actions were assumed to be async, even if they could
be handled synchronously. For most actions this is fine, as most are
currently async. However, `ACTION_RESTORE` (triggered when the
`popstate` event occurs) isn't async, and introducing a small amount of
delay in the handling of this action can cause the browser to not
properly restore the scroll position
### How?
This special-cases `ACTION_RESTORE` to synchronously process the action
and call `setState` when it's received, rather than creating a promise.
To consistently reproduce this behavior, I added an option to our
browser interface that'll allow us to programmatically trigger a CPU
slowdown.
h/t to @alvarlagerlof for isolating the offending commit and sharing a
minimal reproduction.
Closes NEXT-1819
Likely addresses #58899 but the reproduction was too complex to verify.
## What?
- Add support for `experimental.externalDir` -- Was already supported,
just makes Turbopack not fail on that config option
- Skipped `with-babel` test because it tests Babel
- Skipped `swc-warnings` test because it tests Babel
- Skipped `config-resolve-alias` as it tests webpack config
- Skipped `undefined-webpack-config` as it tests webpack config
<!-- 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-1817
### What?
Visiting an edge catch-all route incorrectly truncates multiple
parameters
### Why?
The params are currently coerced into a `ParsedURLQuery`-like format by
calling `Object.fromEntries` on `searchParams`, but this doesn't
consider multiple param values assigned to the same key
### How?
Rather than use `fromEntries`, this uses an existing util to get the
path into `ParsedURLQuery` format.
Closes NEXT-1814
Fixes#59333
### What?
When running a
[multi-zone](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/tree/canary/examples/with-zones)
app in dev, app pages would infinitely reload
### Why?
The HMR upgrade request would fail and get caught into a retry loop. In
the multi-zone case, they fail because the upgrade request would be sent
again for a request that had already been upgraded. This resulted in a
"server.handleUpgrade() was called more than once with the same socket"
error, causing the upgrade request to fail.
Every time a retry occurred, the page would trigger a full refresh since
certain HMR errors cause the browser to reload.
### How?
This ensures the upgrade handler only responds to requests that match
the configured basePath.
Closes NEXT-1797
Fixes#59161Fixes#56615Fixes#54454
This makes some critical modifications to the app render pipeline when
PPR has been enabled for pages with segments defining:
```js
export const dynamic = "force-dynamic"
```
Importantly, it no longer modifies the revalidation time to zero for
those pages, and now falls back to the provided default revalidation
time. When static render occurs, if the page being rendered has a
segment config defining `dynamic === "force-dynamic"`, then it will
postpone at the root of the component tree. This ensures that no render
code is executed for the page, as the entirety of the tree will have
postponed. This fixes the bug where the flight prefetch wasn't generated
correctly as well.
Most of them can now be handled by `optimizePackageImports` as I
manually tested them locally. The main benefit is that structural
updates from these libs won't affect our internal configurations
anymore, as they're automatic with the new approach. The little downside
is that the automatic way is a bit slower than the `modularizeImports`
config as it needs to do extra analyzation. But overall, this is a good
direction.
Depends on #59254.
### What?
Using an interception marker next to a dynamic segment does not behave
properly when deployed to Vercel
### Why?
The named route regex that gets created is not accounting for the
interception marker, which is causing the non-intercepted route to match
the intercepted serverless function.
### How?
This factors in the interception marker when building the named route
regex so that the non-intercepted route regex properly matches when
loading the non-intercepted page.
Deployment verified here: https://test-intercept-mu.vercel.app/
Closes NEXT-1786
Fixes#54650
Fixes#57624. The recent issue was an unexpected side effect caused by
305bb01506,
which only affects specific packages like `@mui/material`.
The problem was that the entry file of `@mui/material` has `"use
client"` at top, which affects the compilation result to output
reference info only (when on the RSC layer), instead of keeping the
original export statements. And the fix here is to ignore all layer info
and React specific transforms here, as barrel optimization isn't related
to all these framework features at all. To keep all directives
unchanged, the SWC transform needs to parse and pass that info to the
Webpack loader.
This PR adds a test to ensure that `@mui/material` is working as
expected (less than 1500 modules compiled). Without this feature it'll
be ~2400 modules.
Closes NEXT-1793, closes NEXT-1762.
### What?
add a few user-focused info-level spans to allow high-level tracing on a
normal build.
`NEXT_TURBOPACK_TRACING=1` can be used to generate a `.next/trace.log`
file
### Why?
Gain insight into build performance and module cost
Closes PACK-2083
Adds process.env.__NEXT_PPR as static flag that it gets inlined by
DefinePlugin during build.
This matches what we do for other experiments, but I do wonder, why do
we bother with process.env at all instead of a global __NEXT_PPR symbol?
I'll leave that for later discussion.
Closes NEXT-1792
Similar in spirit to #58938.
The app router reducer state used to be managed by useReducer, so it was
written to be resilient to rebasing — the same action may be processed
multiple times. Now that we've lifted the reducer outside of React
(#56497), each action runs only a single time. So we can simplify some
of the logic.
The purpose of the `mutable` field was so that if an action is processed
multiple times, state could be reused between each run; for example, to
prevent redundant network fetches. Now that this scenario can no longer
happen, we can remove it.
I had to update some of the unit tests in navigate-reducer because they
were written with the assumption that the reducer was called multiple
times. As far as I can tell, most of this behavior is covered by e2e
tests anyway, so I don't think it's too risky.
Closes NEXT-1782
This resolves an issue introduced in #52361 where `shouldOmit` is
overwritten based on if it is a directory or not without considering
include conditions.
In an environment where the the application being built is orchestrated
and managed by bazel, all files are symbolic links and thus without this
the file includes predicate checks aren't considered - and the build
fails under certain conditions.
<!-- 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 #
-->
---------
Co-authored-by: Shu Ding <g@shud.in>
This ensures we use the correct `srcPathname` in minimal mode so that we
can normalize the URL and generate the correct `ssgCacheKey` which is
used for request caching/de-duping.
We aren't able to add a reliable test case for this as it is a race
condition within a second of a previous request although this was
verified against a stress test repro here
https://overlapping-segments-h1455lwvk-vtest314-ijjk-testing.vercel.app/repro/tutorials/demo
This behavior seems to have regressed in
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/45716
Closes NEXT-1777
### What?
When using a server action on an intercepted route, when submitting that
action, you'd expect it to correspond with the page you're currently on.
However if you have route interception set up, and you load the page
rather than the intercepted page, submitting the action would `POST` to
the intercepted page. This would result in a 404 error because the
action ID you're attempting to submit wouldn't be found on the requested
page.
### Why?
Interception routes rely on the `Next-Url` request header to determine
if an interception should occur via a rewrite. However, server actions
are submitted with this header as well, so the rewrite will be applied
to the `POST` request corresponding with a non-existent action, or an
action on the intercepted page.
### How?
When loading a page that has an intercepted route, `nextUrl` should be
consistent with URL derived from the flight router state tree. But when
an interception occurs via navigation, `nextUrl` will now deviate. I'm
using this to determine whether or not `Next-Url` should be forwarded
along in the `POST` request.
Closes NEXT-1436
Fixes#52591Fixes#49934
### What?
When using rewrites, in the scenario where a user visits an intercepted
route, reloads the page, goes back, and then revisits the same route, we
serve the page rather than the intercepted route.
### Why?
#59094 fixed the case where `ACTION_RESTORE` was not restoring `nextUrl`
properly. However there's a separate issue where when the `SERVER_PATCH`
action comes in, `handleMutable` attempts to compute `nextUrl` by
comparing the patched tree with the current tree. In the case of the
popstate event, both trees are the same, so the logic is currently
configured to fallback to `canonicalUrl`, which is not the correct URL
to use in the case of rewrites.
### How?
If the computed changed path is null, we should only fallback to using
`canonicalUrl` if we don't have a valid `nextUrl` that we can use.
Closes NEXT-1747
Fixes#56072
## What?
While investigating a Turbopack bug we noticed that middleware would be
skipped in development if there was an error during compilation that
caused `ensurePage` to throw. This updates the logic to not catch that
throw and instead make it bubble up correctly.
<!-- 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 #
-->
**Note**: this is a 1-to-1 copy of #48969 by @danieltott with all the
merge conflicts fixed.
## Checklist
* Fixes https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/48966
* Tests added to
`test/production/app-dir/subresource-integrity/subresource-integrity.test.ts`
## Description
Currently `renderToHTMLOrFlight` in app-render pulls out a nonce value
from a `content-security-policy` header for use in generating script
tags:
e7c9d3c051/packages/next/src/server/app-render/app-render.tsx (L1204)
That misses the ability to use a [content-security-policy-report-only
header](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Headers/Content-Security-Policy-Report-Only).
Many times this is a required step to enabling a CSP - by shipping a CSP
with report-only and collecting reports before actually blocking
resources.
## Changes
* Added ability to check `content-security-policy-report-only` header in
`renderToHTMLOrFlight()`
* Added test to verify `nonce` is correctly applied when
`content-security-policy-report-only` header exists
Co-authored-by: Dan Ott <dan@dtott.com>
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
If a manual signal handler is registered, SIGINT and SIGTERM should not
be handled by Next.js. This was already the case in the standalone
server.js but was missing here, rendering the env flag useless.
With this fix, the example given in
https://nextjs.org/docs/pages/building-your-application/deploying#manual-graceful-shutdowns
is working (again).
Fixes#56810.
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
When using `experimental.typedRoutes` in conjunction with
`experimental.webpackBuildWorker`, type errors would be erroneously
thrown during build.
This is because the build workers are parallelized between multiple
runtimes (edge, server, client), but the `typedRoutes` is unique to each
`webpackBuild`. The state needs to shared between the different compile
steps for each instance of the types plugin.
This leverages plugin state to keep share the `typedRoutes` state
amongst the different workers.
Closes NEXT-1734
Fixes#58369
This ensures we don't spam build logs with dynamic usage errors or
similar unexpectedly as they can be caught by this worker process
listener but shouldn't be logged.
Closes NEXT-1763
This:
- Sends an hmr sync event so that errors that occur after the initial
hmr connection are sent to the client
- Aligns on `path/to/file.js:line:column` format across error overlay
implementations in the cli and on the web
- Adapts "Module not found" errors from Turbopack to include
Next.js-relevant formatting and documentation links to align with
webpack
Test Plan: Passes 3 tests that were previously failing
Closes PACK-1974
---------
Co-authored-by: Tobias Koppers <tobias.koppers@googlemail.com>
Co-authored-by: Leah <github.leah@hrmny.sh>
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
### What?
When using interception routes & rewrites, on first interception the
router will properly handle the request. But when using the back button
and attempting another interception, it won't work
### Why?
Intercepting routes rely on the accuracy of `nextUrl` -- but when
`ACTION_RESTORE` is dispatched (in the `popstate` event), `nextUrl` is
restored from `url.pathname` rather than the flight router state.
### How?
This uses the `extractPathFromFlightRouterState` util which will
properly handle setting `nextUrl`. This util is also used when creating
the initial router state.
Closes NEXT-1747
Fixes#56072
### What?
When handling a server action, in the non-progressive enhanced case,
React will attempt to parse the request body before verifying if a valid
server action is received. This results in an "Error: Connection Closed"
error being thrown, rather than ignoring the action and failing more
gracefully
### Why?
To support progressive enhancement with form actions, the `actionId`
value is added as a hidden input in the form, so the action ID from the
header shouldn't be verified until determining that we've reached the
non-PE case. ([React
ref](https://github.com/facebook/react/pull/26774)). However, in
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/49187, support was added for a
URL encoded form (which is not currently used, as indicated on the PR).
Despite it not being used for server actions, it's currently possible to
trigger this codepath, ie by calling redirect in an action handler with
a 307/308 status code with some data in the URL. This would result in a
500 error.
### How?
React should not attempt to parse the URL encoded form data until after
we've verified the server action header for the non-PE case.
x-ref NEXT-1733
[Slack
context](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03S8ED1DKM/p1700674895218399?thread_ts=1700060786.749079&cid=C03S8ED1DKM)
### What?
A `redirect` that occurs during a fetch action will get a status code of
200, while the redirection logic is handled client-side.
### Why?
In this scenario, the redirect is handled by the client router, so no
`Location` is set on the action response. However for debugging /
logging purposes, it'd be useful to still return the same status code
used in other cases (see #58885)
### How?
Rather than selectively setting the status to 303 in the non-fetch
action case, this always applies it.
Closes NEXT-1745
If a build time fetch cache is present from a previous build we don't
want to unexpectedly use it when flush to disk is set to false in a
successive build as it can leverage stale data unexpectedly.
x-ref: [slack
thread](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03S8ED1DKM/p1701266754905909)
Closes NEXT-1750
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
### What?
Calling `redirect` or `permanentRedirect` with a route handler used by a server action will result in that POST request following the redirect. This could result in unexpected behavior, such as re-submitting an action (in the case where the redirected URL makes use of the same server action).
### Why?
By spec, 307 and 308 status codes will attempt to reuse the original request method & body on the redirected URL.
### How?
In all cases when calling a `redirect` handler inside of an action, we'll return a `303 See Other` response which is a typical status code when redirecting to a success / confirmation page as a result of a POST/PUT.
The other option would be to use 301 / 302 status codes, but since we're already doing a 303 status code [here](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/src/server/app-render/action-handler.ts#L603), this aligns the behavior for the route handler case.
Closes NEXT-1733
See also: https://github.com/vercel/next.js/issues/51592#issuecomment-1810212676
[Slack x-ref](https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03S8ED1DKM/p1700060786749079)
fixes: #58909
x-ref: #58321, #56472, #56231
Removed the Math.round of age since it can cause stale fetch data to be
considered not stale if the age rounds downwards. (5.49 is rounded to 5)
Note: This most likely also fixes some bugs with
revalidateTag/revalidatePath. Tested some tag/path issues that got fixed
with this change.
I think this is because revalidatetag/path sets [data.revalidatedAt =
Date.now()](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/packages/next/src/server/lib/incremental-cache/file-system-cache.ts#L120)
for file-system-cache. And with the current code that value would
continue to be "not stale" for up to 0.499 ms.
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
Co-authored-by: Zack Tanner <zacktanner@gmail.com>
Providing better feedback loop for next bindary.
Some users with old node.js version are seeing `performance` is not defined in #57385, we should check the version first.
For compilation, `performace.mark` will also be compiled after those imports since they're hoisted as ESM. This PR moves performance profiling after the `--help` and `--version` processures and node.js version check. So users can see the "upgrade node.js" hint if the node.js version is too old instead of "performance is not defined"
### What?
When the router action queue receives a bunch of async actions in quick succession, some of those requests are dropped, and as a result, anything observing pending transitions will be stuck in a pending state.
### Why?
When adding items to the action queue, the intended behavior is for new actions to be added to the end of the action queue, to be picked up by `runRemainingActions` once the in-flight action is processed. However, new actions are erroneously overwriting pending actions in the queue rather than appending them, as `actionQueue.last` might have a pending action attached to it.
### How?
This moves the assignment of `actionQueue.last` to always be in `dispatchAction`, rather than the function that processes the action, so that we always have a single spot where `last` is assigned and to prevent it from erroneously omitted/overwritten.
Fixes#59011
### What?
Bump up turbopack which includes url rewrite related improvements. This makes `test/integration/url` test passes.
Note there are some lacking behavior around edge runtime + url behavior, it is being tracked in PACK-2014.
Closes PACK-2051
The rewrite request appear to bypass the `BaseServer` or are executed in
the sandbox. However, these requests have the correct test info in the
headers that can be used instead of the `AsyncLocalStorage`.
