refactor(service-worker): make SwPush and SwUpdate tree-shakable
#61670
Conversation
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
In this commit, we mark the `SwPush` and `SwUpdate` classes as root providers. As a result, they are no longer statically referenced in the `provideServiceWorker` providers list, which previously forced them to be explicitly bundled into the main file. These classes might never be used—some consumers may use the service worker only for prefetching and caching assets. Practically speaking, even if a user injects the `SwPush` class without calling `provideServiceWorker()`, it would result in a DI error because the communication channel dependency is not available. There is no practical reason to keep these classes as non-root providers or to reference them explicitly. Currently, some users work around this by using `patch-package` to modify the service worker code and remove these classes from the providers list.
|
I see that you just added the If you want your PR to be merged, it has to pass all the CI checks. If you can't get the PR to a green state due to flakes or broken |
|
This PR was merged into the repository by commit f8c1b6e. The changes were merged into the following branches: main, 20.0.x |
kirjs
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 4, 2025
…61670) In this commit, we mark the `SwPush` and `SwUpdate` classes as root providers. As a result, they are no longer statically referenced in the `provideServiceWorker` providers list, which previously forced them to be explicitly bundled into the main file. These classes might never be used—some consumers may use the service worker only for prefetching and caching assets. Practically speaking, even if a user injects the `SwPush` class without calling `provideServiceWorker()`, it would result in a DI error because the communication channel dependency is not available. There is no practical reason to keep these classes as non-root providers or to reference them explicitly. Currently, some users work around this by using `patch-package` to modify the service worker code and remove these classes from the providers list. PR Close #61670
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.
In this commit, we mark the
SwPushandSwUpdateclasses as root providers. As a result, they are no longer statically referenced in theprovideServiceWorkerproviders list, which previously forced them to be explicitly bundled into the main file. These classes might never be used—some consumers may use the service worker only for prefetching and caching assets.Practically speaking, even if a user injects the
SwPushclass without callingprovideServiceWorker(), it would result in a DI error because the communication channel dependency is not available. There is no practical reason to keep these classes as non-root providers or to reference them explicitly.Currently, some users work around this by using
patch-packageto modify the service worker code and remove these classes from the providers list.