feat: construct `serverEnv`, like we do with `clientEnv` #1000 #1021

iduuck · 2022-12-27T11:49:34Z

Closes #

✅ Checklist

I have followed every step in the contributing guide (updated 2022-10-06).
The PR title follows the convention we established conventional-commit
I performed a functional test on my final commit

Changelog

see feat: make env setup work in middleware #1000

💯

changeset-bot · 2022-12-27T11:49:36Z

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: 4596004

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package

Name	Type
create-t3-app	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

vercel · 2022-12-27T11:49:38Z

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated
create-t3-app	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jan 8, 2023 at 11:10AM (UTC)

github-actions · 2022-12-27T11:51:07Z

⚡️ Lighthouse report for the changes in this PR:

Category	Score
🟢 Performance	100
🟢 Accessibility	100
🟢 Best practices	100
🟠 SEO	86
🟠 PWA	54

Lighthouse ran on https://create-t3-app-git-fork-ksv-vc-iduuck-issue-1000-t3-oss.vercel.app/

juliusmarminge

We shouldnt need 2 separate objects right? Destruction can be in a single object shared with both server and client?

Ideally some comment saying you only need manual destruction for certain use-cases, and not require all envs to be destructured, i.e:

// schema.mjs
const destructured = {
  FOO: process.env.FOO,
  NEXT_PUBLIC_BAR: process.env.NEXT_PUBLIC_BAR,
}

const serverSchema = z.object({
  FOO: z.string(),
  BAZ: z.coerce.boolean(),
});

// server.mjs
serverSchema.parse({
  ...process.env,
  ...destructured
});

env.BAZ Will still work outside of next middleware

iduuck · 2022-12-27T15:44:37Z

I get what you mean, @juliusmarminge. However, I think like this it could be misleading. What we could do, is using the clientEnv and extending the serverEnv with it.

Like:

const clientEnv = { /* ... */ };
const serverEnv = { ...clientEnv, BAZ: process.env.BAZ };

Also: We would be facing some issues with the validation on the middleware-side. When we only add the middleware environment variables one-by-one, it would be giving us schema validation errors, when using on the middleware (because – in your case – BAZ wouldn't be available at the runtime of the middleware).

Edit: Just saw the .coerce – however, this would be even more confusing, when the env variables would be "empty" in some cases.

juliusmarminge · 2022-12-28T02:34:14Z

Fair points. I didnt think of that. I just want to make sure we provide as good DX as possible as many will think its annoying to do this many steps "just to get rid of | undefined 🤔

iduuck · 2022-12-28T10:36:07Z

What | undefined are you referring to, the one in the declaration of serverEnv?

Btw: Do you know, why the build is failing with a wrong import (working for me locally).

juliusmarminge · 2022-12-28T10:52:46Z

What | undefined are you referring to, the one in the declaration of serverEnv?

So I guess where I'm going is if I need to do too much work to get it running in the first place, maybe I'd be fine with using process.env in edge-runtimes and just take the non-null assertion - or maybe we could get #404 working which would type it properly.

// in some edge function, e.g. 'src/middleware.ts'
const baz1 = process.env.BAZ;
//    ^? -> string | undefined


const baz2 = process.env.BAZ!;
//.   ^? -> string

Either would be fine since the variable have been validated to be present during build time.

Maybe I'm drifting here and this isn't a problem for others? I just wanna make sure we don't make it too much work to get environment variables to work or else people might just nuke it all and use process.env for everything 🤔

Btw: Do you know, why the build is failing with a wrong import (working for me locally).

You haven't defined the serverEnv object in the other schema files, just the base one.

iduuck · 2022-12-28T11:22:30Z

I personally wouldn't want to use the non-null assertion throughout my application. Also for the purpose of the env validation, that t3 offers, I am sure there are use-cases, which would be awesome to have default's for.

So, just using process.env isn't feasable (again, personally).

juliusmarminge · 2022-12-29T21:34:55Z

Yea all valid points - curious how many apps use the middleware.ts file and if it's warranted to include this by default, or if we can just leave a comment about it? - the schema.mjs file is already kinda scary as it is 🤔 Although I guess this will get more and more relevant as edge runtime becomes more popular to use for more stuff... Maybe we should file an issue to https://github.com/vercel/next.js and see why this is the case - maybe they are open to change it?

iduuck · 2022-12-30T15:18:16Z

I think this issue is giving us the reason.

This is related to how _middleware.ts is webpack transformed by the middleware-plugin.ts.
Only when you access an env var directly you will get the value. You can't destructure from process.env or get the whole object. I am not sure if this behaviour is intended or should be mentioned in the docs.

I think this is due to the nature of the DefinePlugin of webpack. However, with turbopack, I am curious, if this is working?

iduuck · 2023-01-02T21:46:24Z

What's the plan to go for? Asking Next.js team first and implementing the PR for now? Or are we not wanting to implement the PR as is?

juliusmarminge · 2023-01-02T23:17:24Z

What's the plan to go for? Asking Next.js team first and implementing the PR for now? Or are we not wanting to implement the PR as is?

I think this is the best approach even though I'm not a fan of the extra step - but that seems to be out of our hands unfortunately...

Go ahead and fix this up and we can ship it if no-one else has any objections? @c-ehrlich @nexxeln

nexxeln · 2023-01-03T07:13:30Z

What's the plan to go for? Asking Next.js team first and implementing the PR for now? Or are we not wanting to implement the PR as is?

I think this is the best approach even though I'm not a fan of the extra step - but that seems to be out of our hands unfortunately...

Go ahead and fix this up and we can ship it if no-one else has any objections? @c-ehrlich @nexxeln

Sounds good to me

iduuck · 2023-01-05T09:26:54Z

OK, guys.

Updated the code at the docs (unfortunately, I am only speaking english of all the doc languages, so I was not able to change the text for the other languages)
Synchronized upstream
Fixed all issues from the tests

juliusmarminge

👍👍

juliusmarminge · 2023-01-07T22:27:33Z

Seems like you've disabled maintainers edit priviledges so i cant update your branch

c-ehrlich · 2023-01-07T23:28:08Z

What's the plan to go for? Asking Next.js team first and implementing the PR for now? Or are we not wanting to implement the PR as is?

I think this is the best approach even though I'm not a fan of the extra step - but that seems to be out of our hands unfortunately...

Go ahead and fix this up and we can ship it if no-one else has any objections? @c-ehrlich @nexxeln

Bit late but I agree with this

iduuck · 2023-01-08T11:07:50Z

Seems like you've disabled maintainers edit priviledges so i cant update your branch

How am I able to enable this? This is a repository from my company, so could be that this is the the case company-wide? Couldn't find a way to enable this?

--

Edit: updated manually

juliusmarminge · 2023-01-08T17:06:09Z

Should be on the right side where you request reviews etc

iduuck · 2023-01-08T18:51:47Z

unfortunately nothing there, would have activated this then ...

juliusmarminge · 2023-01-08T18:56:32Z

It's there when you create the PR. Should be a way to update it after creation too??

…3-oss#1021)

iduuck added 2 commits December 27, 2022 12:46

feat: construct serverEnv, like clientEnv

1af71f5

chore: add changeset

3c96d5b

iduuck requested review from juliusmarminge, nexxeln, t3dotgg and c-ehrlich as code owners December 27, 2022 11:49

github-actions bot added 📌 area: cli Relates to the CLI 📌 area: t3-app Relates to the generated T3 App labels Dec 27, 2022

vercel bot deployed to Preview December 27, 2022 11:50 View deployment

juliusmarminge requested changes Dec 27, 2022

View reviewed changes

style: run prettier to format files

a903477

vercel bot deployed to Preview December 28, 2022 10:35 View deployment

iduuck added 2 commits January 5, 2023 10:16

feat: add the environment object to all schema

c3fa90a

docs: update the code on the docs for new env config

281cc0d

github-actions bot added the 📚 documentation Improvements or additions to documentation label Jan 5, 2023

vercel bot deployed to Preview January 5, 2023 09:18 View deployment

chore: merge branch 'next' into feature branch

a20732f

style: remove blank line (prettier fix)

a6aa508

vercel bot deployed to Preview January 5, 2023 09:25 View deployment

juliusmarminge approved these changes Jan 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'next' into iduuck/issue-1000

4596004

vercel bot deployed to Preview January 8, 2023 11:10 View deployment

juliusmarminge merged commit 78dfdc9 into t3-oss:next Jan 8, 2023

github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2023

chore(release): version packages #1059

Merged

iduuck mentioned this pull request Jan 8, 2023

feat: make env setup work in middleware #1000

Closed

juliusmarminge mentioned this pull request Jan 17, 2023

feat: single env file #1092

Merged

3 tasks

devvianto605 pushed a commit to devvianto605/create-devviantex-nextjs-app-deprecated that referenced this pull request Jun 9, 2024

feat: construct serverEnv, like we do with clientEnv t3-oss#1000 (t…

fcfe388

…3-oss#1021)

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

feat: construct `serverEnv`, like we do with `clientEnv` #1000 #1021

feat: construct `serverEnv`, like we do with `clientEnv` #1000 #1021

iduuck commented Dec 27, 2022

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

vercel bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge left a comment •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge commented Dec 28, 2022

iduuck commented Dec 28, 2022

juliusmarminge commented Dec 28, 2022 •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Dec 28, 2022

juliusmarminge commented Dec 29, 2022 •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Dec 30, 2022

iduuck commented Jan 2, 2023

juliusmarminge commented Jan 2, 2023

nexxeln commented Jan 3, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge left a comment

juliusmarminge commented Jan 7, 2023

c-ehrlich commented Jan 7, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge commented Jan 8, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 8, 2023

juliusmarminge commented Jan 8, 2023

feat: construct serverEnv, like we do with clientEnv #1000 #1021

feat: construct serverEnv, like we do with clientEnv #1000 #1021

Conversation

iduuck commented Dec 27, 2022

✅ Checklist

Changelog

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 27, 2022 • edited Loading

🦋 Changeset detected

vercel bot commented Dec 27, 2022 • edited Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 27, 2022 • edited Loading

juliusmarminge left a comment • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

iduuck commented Dec 27, 2022 • edited Loading

juliusmarminge commented Dec 28, 2022

iduuck commented Dec 28, 2022

juliusmarminge commented Dec 28, 2022 • edited Loading

iduuck commented Dec 28, 2022

juliusmarminge commented Dec 29, 2022 • edited Loading

iduuck commented Dec 30, 2022

iduuck commented Jan 2, 2023

juliusmarminge commented Jan 2, 2023

nexxeln commented Jan 3, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 5, 2023 • edited Loading

juliusmarminge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

juliusmarminge commented Jan 7, 2023

c-ehrlich commented Jan 7, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 8, 2023 • edited Loading

juliusmarminge commented Jan 8, 2023

iduuck commented Jan 8, 2023

juliusmarminge commented Jan 8, 2023

feat: construct `serverEnv`, like we do with `clientEnv` #1000 #1021

feat: construct `serverEnv`, like we do with `clientEnv` #1000 #1021

changeset-bot bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

vercel bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge left a comment •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Dec 27, 2022 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge commented Dec 28, 2022 •

edited

Loading

juliusmarminge commented Dec 29, 2022 •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Jan 5, 2023 •

edited

Loading

iduuck commented Jan 8, 2023 •

edited

Loading