Skip to content

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

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

Unable to bust cache of module federation remotes.... #18172

Closed
shibisuriya opened this issue Mar 9, 2024 · 0 comments
Closed

Unable to bust cache of module federation remotes.... #18172

shibisuriya opened this issue Mar 9, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@shibisuriya
Copy link

Feature request

What is the expected behavior?
I use dynamic import() to load the remoteEntry.js file (called moduleEntry.js in the screen shot)... Dynamic import is caching the remoteEntry.js file... I some how forced my app to load new instances of remoteEntry.js using cache busting... But I have no control over what the remoteEntry.js is further loading... The remoteEntry.js is further loading components code using dynamic import from the dev-server... But I can't bust this cache, so old components are getting loaded...

image

What is motivation or use case for adding/changing the behavior?
I am trying to build a dev tool that lets me develop components and embed inside a production webapp... So the remote will be running on my machine and the production app will be loaded from a cdn or something... These components that are loaded from the local, I need to support hot reloading inside the production app instead of refreshing the entire webapp...

How should this be implemented in your opinion?
I don't have deep knowledge about webpack internals... A flag to cache bust not only the entry file but also the components that the entry file loads is good...

Are you willing to work on this yourself?
yes

@webpack webpack locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 11, 2024
@alexander-akait alexander-akait converted this issue into discussion #18177 Mar 11, 2024

This issue was moved to a discussion.

You can continue the conversation there. Go to discussion →

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant