Next.js tests are grouped based on timing data to better distribute them
for parallelization.
Previously this relied on a gist file that we would write to in CI.
However, this has more recently started resulting in 401s.
The actual reason for the 401s is the Turbo task wasn't propagating the
required environment variable to the task. It was mostly working by
accident, because we would store timing data on disk for the runner,
which would have been satisfied by a job that ran before it.
However despite that, relying on a gist file to read/write timing data
didn't feel like the write abstraction. I decided to refactor it to use
KV instead.
This also makes the handling more resilient to missing timing data. We
shouldn't fail the build if we can't fetch timings, as there's already
handling to fallback to round robin.
<!-- 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
### How?
Closes NEXT-
Fixes #
-->
### What?
This PR introduces a ground work to generate wasm bindings package from
our napi bindings. This doesn't actually replace anything yet, however
aim to establish our napi bindings package can be built against wasm32
target.
### Why?
We currently have two bindings package to generate native / wasm target
support, one for napi and one other for wasm. Recently napi-rs started
to support to generate bindings for the wasm directly - which means we
can get rid of the wasm-pack based bindings code entirely and maintain a
single bindings code only.
This'll makes our `next-swc` simpler as well, since the invocation to
the bindings now becomes identical we don't have to additional wasm
specific logics to invoke functions (i.e transform, transformsync..).
Also napi generates wasi-supported wasm bindings, provides few more
features to the current wasm bindings.
#### Good
- Async napi binding fn works transparently (`transform`, `minify`...)
- (Experimental) thread supports depends on node.js runtime
- Wasi support: i.e it can even read filesystem directly!
#### Things to consider
- node.js's wasi support is experimental yet
- napi-rs's wasm support is in beta yet, specifically `packaging`
generated wasm output.
Due to `things to consider` reasons, this PR does not replace existing
wasm target yet. We should be able to plan out things later.
**What happens to the turbopack api in napi bindings?**
Simply put, this **does not support turbopack in wasm**. Build works by
disabling turbopack (more notably, underlying dependency doesn't support
wasm) features. It is something to explore separately.
Closes PACK-2367
There is a branch at https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/61586 shows
quick demo for importing, running sync / async / read external files.
<!-- 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
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/60400/commits/2cedd06ea55f71478206d60f832acc3cd5763362
:
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>
This fixes our caching for the docker builds as they were missing inputs
the other jobs had also enables caching the rust target cache which
improves build times when only changing our package and the lockfile
isn't invalidated.
Tested here https://github.com/vercel/next.js/actions/runs/5987764387
This contains the original POC for `next build --turbo`. The implementation is _just enough_ to get pages building, and doesn't support the app router yet.
I'll write more details here on the implementation and what the next steps are next week.
Necessary changes on the Turbo side: https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/4998
### What?
* enable turbopack tests in new CI
* split pre-build step into native and JS builds to allow to start
native tests faster
* update swc_core to sync with turbo
* update turbopack
### Why?
Running our test suite is still important as long we don't have the full
integration test suite enabled.
### Turbopack updates
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/5215 <!-- OJ Kwon - ci(workflow):
upload benchmark results to datadog -->
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/5239 <!-- OJ Kwon -
fix(swc_plugin): use shared runtime -->
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/3090 <!-- CHEN Yuan - Docs: prior
to run testcases, add guides to install dependencies for testcases. -->
* https://github.com/vercel/turbo/pull/5264 <!-- Tobias Koppers - update
test runner -->
---------
Co-authored-by: JJ Kasper <jj@jjsweb.site>
This adds new `build and test` and `build and deploy` workflows in favor
of the existing massive `build, test, and deploy` workflow. Since the
new workflows will use `pull_request_target` this waits to remove the
existing workflow until the new one is tested.
While testing this new workflow flakey behavior in tests have also been
addressed. Along with the new workflow we will also be leveraging new
runners which allow us to run tests against the production binary of
`next-swc` so this avoids slight differences in tests we've seen due to
running against the dev binary.
Furthermore we will have a new flow for allowing workflow runs on PRs
from external forks which will either require a comment be checking a
box approving the run after each change or a label added by the team.
The new flow also no longer relies on `actions/cache` or similar which
have proven to be pretty unreliable.
Tests runs with the new workflow can be seen here
https://github.com/vercel/next.js/actions/runs/5100673508/jobs/9169416949
### What?
Disable `tracing/release_max_level_info` for non-published release
builds. I modified CI script to strip out logging for published
binaries.
### Why?
x-ref: https://vercel.slack.com/archives/C03EWR7LGEN/p1683621374204959
It's required to print logging for turbopack.
### How?
Closes WEB-1032
---------
Co-authored-by: Tobias Koppers <tobias.koppers@googlemail.com>
We decided in https://github.com/vercel/next.js/pull/48308 that we won't
use `turbo` when packing packages for tests.
This PR removes all code associated with that effort. The whole thing
fas behind a flag, so it shouldn't affect anything.
fix NEXT-1025
Re-lands #40335 but without modifying the lock file.
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Feature
- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have a helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm lint`
- [ ] The "examples guidelines" are followed from [our contributing doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing/examples/adding-examples.md)
Utilize `turbo` for `dev`, and make sure polyfills are built. Fixes#40334
Another option would be to document that an initial `pnpm build` is necessary in [`CONTRIBUTING.md`](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md#developing).
## Bug
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Feature
- [ ] Implements an existing feature request or RFC. Make sure the feature request has been accepted for implementation before opening a PR.
- [ ] Related issues linked using `fixes #number`
- [ ] Integration tests added
- [ ] Documentation added
- [ ] Telemetry added. In case of a feature if it's used or not.
- [ ] Errors have helpful link attached, see `contributing.md`
## Documentation / Examples
- [ ] Make sure the linting passes by running `pnpm lint`
- [ ] The examples guidelines are followed from [our contributing doc](https://github.com/vercel/next.js/blob/canary/contributing.md#adding-examples)
Zack Tanner