Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: wrongly resolve to optimized doppelganger #11290

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Dec 12, 2022

Conversation

csr632
Copy link
Member

@csr632 csr632 commented Dec 9, 2022

Description

This PR fix a bug:
when a dependency has a doppelganger (duplicate package with same name but different version), and one of it is optimized, then some dependents of the package wrongly get the optimized version(expect unoptimized version).

Example:

- project
  - test-package-b@1.0.0 (optimized)
  - test-package-a (not optimized)
    - test-package-b@2.0.0

When test-package-a import test-package-b, it expects test-package-b@2.0.0. But it actually get test-package-b@1.0.0 (the optimized bundle).
It should resolve to the nested dependency, instead of the optimized doppelganger.

Additional context


What is the purpose of this pull request?

  • Bug fix
  • New Feature
  • Documentation update
  • Other

Before submitting the PR, please make sure you do the following

  • Read the Contributing Guidelines.
  • Read the Pull Request Guidelines and follow the Commit Convention.
  • Check that there isn't already a PR that solves the problem the same way to avoid creating a duplicate.
  • Provide a description in this PR that addresses what the PR is solving, or reference the issue that it solves (e.g. fixes #123).
  • Ideally, include relevant tests that fail without this PR but pass with it.

@csr632
Copy link
Member Author

csr632 commented Dec 10, 2022

return depsOptimizer.getOptimizedDepId(depInfo)

I think the wrong result is return by this line. It return the optimized bundle without checking whether it is resolveable from theimporter.

@csr632 csr632 changed the title test: wrongly resolve to optimized doppelganger fix: wrongly resolve to optimized doppelganger Dec 10, 2022
@csr632
Copy link
Member Author

csr632 commented Dec 10, 2022

I just push a commit to fix it.
@patak-dev @bluwy Could you review this when you have time?

@bluwy bluwy added p3-minor-bug An edge case that only affects very specific usage (priority) feat: deps optimizer Esbuild Dependencies Optimization labels Dec 10, 2022
@csr632 csr632 requested a review from bluwy December 11, 2022 10:15
@csr632 csr632 requested a review from bluwy December 12, 2022 13:09
@patak-dev
Copy link
Member

/ecosystem-ci run

@vite-ecosystem-ci
Copy link

vite-ecosystem-ci bot commented Dec 12, 2022

📝 Ran ecosystem CI: Open

suite result
astro ✅ success
histoire ✅ success
iles ✅ success
ladle ✅ success
laravel ✅ success
marko ✅ success
nuxt-framework ❌ failure
previewjs ✅ success
rakkas ✅ success
sveltekit ❌ failure
vite-plugin-ssr ✅ success
vite-plugin-react ✅ success
vite-plugin-react-swc ✅ success
vite-plugin-svelte ✅ success
vite-plugin-vue ✅ success
vite-setup-catalogue ✅ success
vitepress ✅ success
vitest ✅ success
windicss ✅ success

@patak-dev
Copy link
Member

/ecosystem-ci run nuxt-framework

@vite-ecosystem-ci
Copy link

vite-ecosystem-ci bot commented Dec 12, 2022

📝 Ran ecosystem CI: Open

suite result
nuxt-framework ✅ success

@patak-dev
Copy link
Member

/ecosystem-ci run sveltekit

@vite-ecosystem-ci
Copy link

vite-ecosystem-ci bot commented Dec 12, 2022

📝 Ran ecosystem CI: Open

suite result
sveltekit ❌ failure

@patak-dev
Copy link
Member

/ecosystem-ci run sveltekit

@vite-ecosystem-ci
Copy link

vite-ecosystem-ci bot commented Dec 12, 2022

📝 Ran ecosystem CI: Open

suite result
sveltekit ✅ success

patak-dev added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2022
This reverts commit 34fec41.
@patak-dev patak-dev mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2022
4 tasks
patak-dev added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2022
csr632 added a commit to csr632/vite that referenced this pull request Dec 18, 2022
csr632 added a commit to csr632/vite that referenced this pull request Jan 5, 2023
@csr632
Copy link
Member Author

csr632 commented Jan 26, 2023

This is reworked in #11410

futurGH pushed a commit to futurGH/vite that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2023
futurGH pushed a commit to futurGH/vite that referenced this pull request Feb 26, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feat: deps optimizer Esbuild Dependencies Optimization p3-minor-bug An edge case that only affects very specific usage (priority)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants