Keep backups, even when they're old. #2734
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the [behavior from sprockets][sprockets], in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age *AND* within the count limit. I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked. [sprockets]: https://github.com/rails/sprockets/blob/358f83ff09a77f69ac17543a9b1d127737060f00/lib/sprockets/manifest.rb#L258-L259
|
thank you 🍰 |
braddunbar
added a commit
to harvesthq/webpacker
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2020
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the [behavior from sprockets][sprockets], in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age *AND* within the count limit. I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked. [sprockets]: https://github.com/rails/sprockets/blob/358f83ff09a77f69ac17543a9b1d127737060f00/lib/sprockets/manifest.rb#L258-L259
braddunbar
added a commit
to harvesthq/webpacker
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 22, 2020
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the [behavior from sprockets][sprockets], in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age *AND* within the count limit. I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked. [sprockets]: https://github.com/rails/sprockets/blob/358f83ff09a77f69ac17543a9b1d127737060f00/lib/sprockets/manifest.rb#L258-L259
|
@gauravtiwari Can you point me to any docs on releasing webpacker updates? I'd love to help backport this bugfix to 5.X.X, as we're currently using a custom fork to get this fix, and cut a release! |
KSJake
added a commit
to KennaSecurity/webpacker
that referenced
this pull request
Sep 28, 2020
|
@gauravtiwari @Pezmc +1. We just encountered this issue as well and it caused lots of missing assets on our prod env. I'd really like to see it back-ported to 5.X.X as well. |
|
+1 to backporting this to 5.x! we were bitten by this issue in production today! |
oboxodo
pushed a commit
to Quimbee/webpacker
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 3, 2021
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the [behavior from sprockets][sprockets], in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age *AND* within the count limit. I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked. [sprockets]: https://github.com/rails/sprockets/blob/358f83ff09a77f69ac17543a9b1d127737060f00/lib/sprockets/manifest.rb#L258-L259
|
It turns out our issue was a bit different than this. This issue certainly didn't help us, but wasn't the root cause of our issues. I've created a GH issue over at #2913 describing what we ran into. |
gauravtiwari
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 27, 2021
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the [behavior from sprockets][sprockets], in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age *AND* within the count limit. I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked. [sprockets]: https://github.com/rails/sprockets/blob/358f83ff09a77f69ac17543a9b1d127737060f00/lib/sprockets/manifest.rb#L258-L259 Backport-PR-URL: #2912 Co-authored-by: Brad Dunbar <dunbarb2@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Recently, we encountered an issue with webpacker removing our previous assets during the webpacker:clean task, and not keeping the specified number of backups. We expected the behavior from sprockets, in which assets are kept if under age or within the count limit. However, webpacker only keeps assets if under age AND within the count limit.
I think this should work like sprockets and has perhaps been overlooked.