-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 87
fix: support setting cookies from MiddlewareResponse #2027
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
Merged
Merged
Changes from 13 commits
Commits
Show all changes
22 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
bf7c0ef
fix: try building repro
Skn0tt f079df1
fix: install next middleware before building
Skn0tt 0ff3cf4
fix: update test expectation
Skn0tt 6b8ae95
fix: use local version of utils
Skn0tt 6ce0d37
fix: typo
Skn0tt ad127f2
fix: some more
Skn0tt 188c283
fix: the bug
Skn0tt e87c484
fix: typo
Skn0tt 3395f20
fix: revert changes to next.config.js
Skn0tt b93c80a
fix: typo
Skn0tt f841be2
fix: oops
Skn0tt 69047bb
fix: header exists (see .has above)
Skn0tt c9fadfb
fix: use headers.get
Skn0tt f4a2f98
fix: move test into cypress code
Skn0tt ce7d5ad
fix: revert changes to e2e
Skn0tt 3d38c55
fix: remove console.log
Skn0tt 2e0f9d4
fix: add another assertion for headers
Skn0tt 0fe1289
revert one more line
Skn0tt 983b23a
Merge branch 'main' into repro-cookies
taty2010 8ac422a
chore: trigger build
taty2010 1388048
Merge branch 'main' into repro-cookies
taty2010 8ffb737
chore: updated config to include cookies/middleware
taty2010 File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
This file contains hidden or 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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
These files are the tests from the Next.js repo, so shouldn't have new ones added. New ones should go in either Cypress or Jest tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that's true (and let me know if you want me to move them @Skn0tt because the folder structure can be a bit difficult to navigate)
however, i've wondered for a while whether we should use the Next.js repo pattern for our own e2e/integration tests - i.e. spinning up small, specific Next.js apps rather than testing against the demo sites, which include a mixed bag of functionality - it seems easier to reason around
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Absolutely. They should be a new suite of tests though
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
that'd be lovely, yeah!
i'm not sure wether mix fix actually fixes the problem, but having tests in the right directory would definitely help :D