Skip to content

Conversation

@arimendelow
Copy link
Contributor

Not only did I find adding environments with ssr to not be necessary, but including it on v0.0.88 breaks my app:
Screenshot 2025-06-08 at 20 14 43

The errors says that it'll ask for a reload, but the error doesn't go away even if you restart the dev server, and in any case it's working just fine without it 🤷🏼‍♂️

@justinvdm
Copy link
Collaborator

and in any case it's working just fine without it 🤷🏼‍♂️

@arimendelow have you tried a pnpm build? I was able to repro it again on 0.0.88 and @tailwindcs/vite 4.1.8 here: redwoodjs/sdk-experiments#4

If you have a import stylesUrl from "./styles.css?url" + @import "tailwindcss" in styles.css + tailwind() in your vite config, then try pnpm build, that should be enough to repro the issue.

Please let me know if you repro it with that ^, and I'll close this PR.

That all said, this workaround shouldn't be needed on 0.1.0-alpha builds, so we won't need this in docs much longer.

Regarding the error you're running into, does this happen even after clearing node_modules/.vite and rerunning pnpm dev? If so, would you be able to push up a repro of the issue? I've never seen it before tbh, and we've had quite a few projects using tailwind so far with rwsdk.

@arimendelow
Copy link
Contributor Author

Good callouts. Will try all this and get back to you!

@ahaywood
Copy link
Contributor

@arimendelow Did you get a chance to try this?

@arimendelow
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ahaywood noooo i've been distracted by two other issues 🙈 — server function I/O errors that i don't understand and my requestInfo's header coming back as empty and refusing to be set. i'm thinking it's maybe time to start fresh on 0.1.0 and copy my code over bit by bit (tbh there's not a lot) to hopefully understand more about why and when things are breaking. but i digress 😃

in any case, we don't need the env config anymore, right?

@peterp
Copy link
Member

peterp commented Jul 2, 2025

@ahaywood Can you test this and confirm that it's not required anymore?

@peterp peterp requested a review from ahaywood July 2, 2025 09:41
@peterp
Copy link
Member

peterp commented Jul 9, 2025

I can confirm that this is still required.

@peterp peterp closed this Jul 9, 2025
@arimendelow
Copy link
Contributor Author

Whaaaat I wonder why I didn't need it in my project. I suppose I need to move to 0.1.0 stable.

Thanks Peter!

@ahaywood
Copy link
Contributor

ahaywood commented Jul 9, 2025

@peterp Thanks, Peter!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants