Skip to content
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

fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.2 #30

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 7, 2024

Conversation

renovate[bot]
Copy link
Contributor

@renovate renovate bot commented Dec 6, 2023

Mend Renovate

This PR contains the following updates:

Package Change Age Adoption Passing Confidence
react-router-dom (source) 6.20.1 -> 6.22.2 age adoption passing confidence

Release Notes

remix-run/react-router (react-router-dom)

v6.22.2

Compare Source

Patch Changes

v6.22.1

Compare Source

v6.22.0

Compare Source

Minor Changes
  • Include a window__reactRouterVersion tag for CWV Report detection (#​11222)
Patch Changes

v6.21.3

Compare Source

Patch Changes
  • Fix NavLink isPending when a basename is used (#​11195)
  • Remove leftover unstable_ prefix from Blocker/BlockerFunction types (#​11187)
  • Updated dependencies:

v6.21.2

Compare Source

v6.21.1

Compare Source

Patch Changes

v6.21.0

Compare Source

Minor Changes
  • Add a new future.v7_relativeSplatPath flag to implement a breaking bug fix to relative routing when inside a splat route. (#​11087)

    This fix was originally added in #​10983 and was later reverted in #​11078 because it was determined that a large number of existing applications were relying on the buggy behavior (see #​11052)

    The Bug
    The buggy behavior is that without this flag, the default behavior when resolving relative paths is to ignore any splat (*) portion of the current route path.

    The Background
    This decision was originally made thinking that it would make the concept of nested different sections of your apps in <Routes> easier if relative routing would replace the current splat:

    <BrowserRouter>
      <Routes>
        <Route path="/" element={<Home />} />
        <Route path="dashboard/*" element={<Dashboard />} />
      </Routes>
    </BrowserRouter>

    Any paths like /dashboard, /dashboard/team, /dashboard/projects will match the Dashboard route. The dashboard component itself can then render nested <Routes>:

    function Dashboard() {
      return (
        <div>
          <h2>Dashboard</h2>
          <nav>
            <Link to="/">Dashboard Home</Link>
            <Link to="team">Team</Link>
            <Link to="projects">Projects</Link>
          </nav>
    
          <Routes>
            <Route path="/" element={<DashboardHome />} />
            <Route path="team" element={<DashboardTeam />} />
            <Route path="projects" element={<DashboardProjects />} />
          </Routes>
        </div>
      );
    }

    Now, all links and route paths are relative to the router above them. This makes code splitting and compartmentalizing your app really easy. You could render the Dashboard as its own independent app, or embed it into your large app without making any changes to it.

    The Problem

    The problem is that this concept of ignoring part of a path breaks a lot of other assumptions in React Router - namely that "." always means the current location pathname for that route. When we ignore the splat portion, we start getting invalid paths when using ".":

    // If we are on URL /dashboard/team, and we want to link to /dashboard/team:
    function DashboardTeam() {
      // ❌ This is broken and results in <a href="/dashboard">
      return <Link to=".">A broken link to the Current URL</Link>;
    
      // ✅ This is fixed but super unintuitive since we're already at /dashboard/team!
      return <Link to="./team">A broken link to the Current URL</Link>;
    }

    We've also introduced an issue that we can no longer move our DashboardTeam component around our route hierarchy easily - since it behaves differently if we're underneath a non-splat route, such as /dashboard/:widget. Now, our "." links will, properly point to ourself inclusive of the dynamic param value so behavior will break from it's corresponding usage in a /dashboard/* route.

    Even worse, consider a nested splat route configuration:

    <BrowserRouter>
      <Routes>
        <Route path="dashboard">
          <Route path="*" element={<Dashboard />} />
        </Route>
      </Routes>
    </BrowserRouter>

    Now, a <Link to="."> and a <Link to=".."> inside the Dashboard component go to the same place! That is definitely not correct!

    Another common issue arose in Data Routers (and Remix) where any <Form> should post to it's own route action if you the user doesn't specify a form action:

    let router = createBrowserRouter({
      path: "/dashboard",
      children: [
        {
          path: "*",
          action: dashboardAction,
          Component() {
            // ❌ This form is broken!  It throws a 405 error when it submits because
            // it tries to submit to /dashboard (without the splat value) and the parent
            // `/dashboard` route doesn't have an action
            return <Form method="post">...</Form>;
          },
        },
      ],
    });

    This is just a compounded issue from the above because the default location for a Form to submit to is itself (".") - and if we ignore the splat portion, that now resolves to the parent route.

    The Solution
    If you are leveraging this behavior, it's recommended to enable the future flag, move your splat to it's own route, and leverage ../ for any links to "sibling" pages:

    <BrowserRouter>
      <Routes>
        <Route path="dashboard">
          <Route index path="*" element={<Dashboard />} />
        </Route>
      </Routes>
    </BrowserRouter>
    
    function Dashboard() {
      return (
        <div>
          <h2>Dashboard</h2>
          <nav>
            <Link to="..">Dashboard Home</Link>
            <Link to="../team">Team</Link>
            <Link to="../projects">Projects</Link>
          </nav>
    
          <Routes>
            <Route path="/" element={<DashboardHome />} />
            <Route path="team" element={<DashboardTeam />} />
            <Route path="projects" element={<DashboardProjects />} />
          </Router>
        </div>
      );
    }

    This way, . means "the full current pathname for my route" in all cases (including static, dynamic, and splat routes) and .. always means "my parents pathname".

Patch Changes

Configuration

📅 Schedule: Branch creation - At any time (no schedule defined), Automerge - At any time (no schedule defined).

🚦 Automerge: Disabled by config. Please merge this manually once you are satisfied.

Rebasing: Whenever PR becomes conflicted, or you tick the rebase/retry checkbox.

🔕 Ignore: Close this PR and you won't be reminded about this update again.


  • If you want to rebase/retry this PR, check this box

This PR has been generated by Mend Renovate. View repository job log here.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the size/XXL label Dec 6, 2023
@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.20.1 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.20.1 - autoclosed Dec 9, 2023
@renovate renovate bot closed this Dec 9, 2023
@renovate renovate bot deleted the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch December 9, 2023 09:07
@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.20.1 - autoclosed fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.20.1 Dec 13, 2023
@renovate renovate bot restored the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch December 13, 2023 22:41
@renovate renovate bot reopened this Dec 13, 2023
@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.20.1 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.0 Dec 14, 2023
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from db11681 to e2d07bf Compare December 14, 2023 02:04
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Dec 14, 2023

I Skip it since the diff size(956461 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.0 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.1 Dec 21, 2023
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from e2d07bf to 4bf7a5a Compare December 21, 2023 17:01
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Dec 21, 2023

I Skip it since the diff size(956538 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.1 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.2 Jan 11, 2024
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from 4bf7a5a to a116432 Compare January 11, 2024 17:50
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jan 11, 2024

I Skip it since the diff size(956461 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.2 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.3 Jan 18, 2024
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from a116432 to 33497fd Compare January 18, 2024 20:10
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jan 18, 2024

I Skip it since the diff size(956461 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from 33497fd to 474a5c9 Compare January 28, 2024 11:21
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Jan 28, 2024

I Skip it since the diff size(956461 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from 474a5c9 to 0a53f3a Compare February 1, 2024 22:43
@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.21.3 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.0 Feb 1, 2024
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Feb 1, 2024

I Skip it since the diff size(956538 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.0 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.1 Feb 16, 2024
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from 0a53f3a to b27ed7c Compare February 16, 2024 22:05
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Feb 16, 2024

I Skip it since the diff size(956461 bytes > 80000 bytes) is too large

wuhuizuo
wuhuizuo previously approved these changes Feb 23, 2024
@renovate renovate bot force-pushed the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch from 0b9ce20 to 33312e7 Compare February 28, 2024 22:21
@renovate renovate bot changed the title fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.1 fix(deps): update dependency react-router-dom to v6.22.2 Feb 28, 2024
@wuhuizuo
Copy link
Contributor

wuhuizuo commented Mar 7, 2024

/lgtm
/approve

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the lgtm label Mar 7, 2024
Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Mar 7, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: wuhuizuo

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

Copy link

ti-chi-bot bot commented Mar 7, 2024

[LGTM Timeline notifier]

Timeline:

  • 2024-02-23 05:10:05.927819824 +0000 UTC m=+593094.675442932: ☑️ agreed by wuhuizuo.
  • 2024-02-23 05:11:47.601452153 +0000 UTC m=+593196.349075263: ✖️🔁 reset by renovate[bot].
  • 2024-03-07 09:30:33.231604702 +0000 UTC m=+332260.253851289: ☑️ agreed by wuhuizuo.

@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot added the approved label Mar 7, 2024
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot merged commit 2020429 into main Mar 7, 2024
3 checks passed
@ti-chi-bot ti-chi-bot bot deleted the renovate/react-router-monorepo branch March 7, 2024 09:32
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.

1 participant