Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Conversation

danielroe
Copy link
Member

πŸ”— Linked issue

resolves #13499

❓ Type of change

  • πŸ“– Documentation (updates to the documentation or readme)
  • 🐞 Bug fix (a non-breaking change that fixes an issue)
  • πŸ‘Œ Enhancement (improving an existing functionality like performance)
  • ✨ New feature (a non-breaking change that adds functionality)
  • 🧹 Chore (updates to the build process or auxiliary tools and libraries)
  • ⚠️ Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

πŸ“š Description

Revisiting my take on this, I think this is a reasonable change to make given that it will make chunks safer (without risk of being blocked by ad blockers).

It doesn't change entry (entry.239847a.js) for ease of detecting it in the list or asset names (as I think it makes sense that this would preserve the file name).

πŸ“ Checklist

  • I have linked an issue or discussion.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.

Copy link

Review PR in StackBlitz Codeflow Run & review this pull request in StackBlitz Codeflow.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the 3.x label Mar 11, 2024
@TheAlexLichter
Copy link
Member

I have no hard feelings on this one as it can be easily configured by the user.
Happy to go with less "descriptive" filenames but a lower risk of false positives through adblock πŸ‘

@pi0
Copy link
Member

pi0 commented Mar 14, 2024

@danielroe can you please confirm if nitrojs/nitro#2250 is blocking this PR or not? Thinking to move Nitro main to feature release mode.

@danielroe
Copy link
Member Author

@pi0 Yes, it is. But don't want to mess with your release schedule. πŸ™

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

component name visible in chunk names
3 participants