-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 828
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
Drop support for WorkboxSW's handleFetch? #1002
Comments
Couldn't this be moved into By default register the fetch event listener and add a method |
One complication I was thinking of was that there's a separate I could always conditionally output either Just wanted to get a feel for how useful folks felt this was in v3. |
I'm really torn to be honest. While DevTools will just work, it's a nice developer workflow to have handleFetch in the build chain. Arguably, for development, you could just output an empty SW, I can't imagine there is much benefit otherwise. |
I'll leave it out initially and we can see if anyone asks for it to be added back during the public previews. We've got so many different entry points/build pipelines nowadays, it's hard to know what folks will actually find useful. |
Closing this since the decision was reached, and we can reopen to track |
Library Affected:
workbox-sw
Historically, we've supported a
handleFetch
option that gets passed in as part of the build process, and when set tofalse
, disables thefetch
handler that Workbox registers. The primary use case was creating a somewhat no-op-y service worker to use in development environments.I'm debating whether to port this over to v3, as there's no longer centralized
fetch
handlers to control underWorkboxSW
's purview, and am open to removing it.Thoughts from other folks?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: