Making pack:web work by adding polyfill
#2678
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
PR: dependencies
|
I think you still need to run |
auto-merge was automatically disabled
October 5, 2022 10:52
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
auto-merge was automatically disabled
October 5, 2022 10:58
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
`buffer` doesn't have to be included through browserify
auto-merge was automatically disabled
October 5, 2022 11:05
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
ChunkyProgrammer
requested review from
ChunkyProgrammer,
absidue,
efb4f5ff-1298-471a-8973-3d47447115dc and
PikachuEXE
ChunkyProgrammer
previously approved these changes
Oct 5, 2022
PikachuEXE
previously approved these changes
Oct 6, 2022
absidue
previously approved these changes
Oct 6, 2022
github-actions
bot
added
PR: merge conflicts / rebase needed
and removed
PR: waiting for review
|
This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request. |
…ills-to-pack-web # Conflicts: # yarn.lock
auto-merge was automatically disabled
October 6, 2022 14:38
Head branch was pushed to by a user without write access
MarmadileManteater
dismissed stale reviews from absidue, PikachuEXE, and ChunkyProgrammer
via
53906ad
|
Conflicts have been resolved. A maintainer will review the pull request shortly. |
efb4f5ff-1298-471a-8973-3d47447115dc
added
the
PR: waiting for review
PikachuEXE
approved these changes
Oct 6, 2022
absidue
approved these changes
Oct 6, 2022
efb4f5ff-1298-471a-8973-3d47447115dc
approved these changes
Oct 6, 2022
github-actions
bot
removed
the
PR: waiting for review
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Making
pack:webwork by adding polyfillPull Request Type
Description
This PR makes the
pack:webscript work by adding the polyfill from browserify to webpack. This should effectively be the same thing as runningbrowserifyon the result of webpack; except that, it is way faster to build, and it won't bugger up the nice clean directory structure that webpack puts inInspect Elementin development builds. These things alone make this web build infinitely easier to debug and run than my existing web build.Screenshots
Before:
After:
Testing
yarn pack:webwill create all of the files needed for the web build, but since this web app needs to be hosted on a server and cannot be served directly off the filesystem, you will probably want to break out your favorite one liner likehttp-serverand navigate tohttp://127.0.0.1:8080/dist/web/index.html.Desktop (please complete the following information):
Additional context
It may be worth noting, but there is code currently in the codebase which assumes that the application is in Electron if the environment is development. That code may have to be changed in the future if it would make sense to run the web build in development mode.
One major caveat of this solution is that it depends on bringing in two new packages
browserify@^17.0.0andprocess@^0.11.10. I don't see a way to achieve this without bringing in at least one new package or manually writing all of our own polyfill. Both of those solutions have their advantages and disadvantages.