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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
SplitChunksPlugin shouldn't change entrypoint chunk name #10910
SplitChunksPlugin shouldn't change entrypoint chunk name #10910
Conversation
For maintainers only:
|
Hello 馃憢 |
e7841a1
to
c41da59
Compare
test/Defaults.unittest.js
Outdated
@@ -807,7 +807,7 @@ describe("Defaults", () => { | |||
- "idHint": "vendors", | |||
- "priority": -10, | |||
- "reuseExistingChunk": true, | |||
- "test": /[\\\\/]node_modules[\\\\/]/i, | |||
- "test": /[\\\\\\/]node_modules[\\\\\\/]/i, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Remove changes from this tests, bug on old node
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
https://travis-ci.org/github/webpack/webpack/builds/696989436 |
4ab765d
to
75144cf
Compare
Thank you for your pull request! The most important CI builds succeeded, we鈥檒l review the pull request soon. |
Why is it important? If you need it for inclusion in the HTML, I have to disappoint you. You need to include all splitted files into the HTML. So even the files with a hash. |
I don't bundle for the browser (rather for the cloud, i.e. AWS Lambda), I bundle node code with multiple entry points, when I don't use the When I do use Could you elaborate on the benefits of having entry points names with hash? |
Can not reproduce problem with latest webpack. Please create a new issue with repro if problem still exist. |
Hello 馃憢
When using the
maxSize
option ofSplitChunksPlugin
, the entry point name is changed to include the hash.Not sure if that was intended or not.
IMO, it's really important for entrypoints to retain a constant predictable name.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
bugfix
Did you add tests for your changes?
yes on a standalone project with multiple entrypoints and a maxSize limit.
A test case is included in this PR. I had to update the snapshot(s) (not 100% sure that's ok)
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?
no
What needs to be documented once your changes are merged?