feat: enhance file resolution logic for Convex #127

prisis · 2025-06-24T16:04:19Z

configuration and schema files

Updated bundler to check for multiple file extensions (.ts, .js, .mjs) for schema files.
Improved component root path resolution to prioritize new file types.
Adjusted comments and error messages for clarity regarding supported file types.

This change ensures better compatibility and flexibility in handling various configuration file formats.

fixes #126

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

…ma files - Updated bundler to check for multiple file extensions (.ts, .js, .mjs, .cjs) for schema and auth configuration files. - Improved component root path resolution to prioritize new file types. - Adjusted comments and error messages for clarity regarding supported file types. This change ensures better compatibility and flexibility in handling various configuration file formats.

thomasballinger

I don't think we want the component-related changes, but if anyone has a reason to need to use alternative file extensions for files like schema and auth.config we can do that; just want to hear about the uses cases first so we can add realistic tests of them and we know what we're supporting

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T18:07:23Z

npm-packages/convex/src/bundler/index.ts

-  let target = path.resolve(dir, "schema.ts");
-  if (!ctx.fs.exists(target)) {
-    target = path.resolve(dir, "schema.js");
+  const candidates = [


would love to hear if people are using these extensions and why, but if this is helpful we can make this change. I'd guess the various TypeScript extensions would be more important? .mts, .cts, etc than .js, since most users use TypeScript? But I haven't heard requests for either

I didnt see a lot of developer using .mts and .cts for typescript files.

This is fine if we remove .cjs, we never want to bundle a commonjs schema.

npm-packages/convex/src/bundler/index.ts

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T18:13:29Z

npm-packages/convex/src/cli/lib/components.ts

@@ -54,19 +54,27 @@ import { Reporter, Span } from "./tracing.js";
 import {
  DEFINITION_FILENAME_JS,
  DEFINITION_FILENAME_TS,
+  DEFINITION_FILENAME_MJS,
+  DEFINITION_FILENAME_CJS,


the component changes I do not want to make without understanding the use cases. The spec for components isn't well-defined yet but I wouldn't want to make what's accepted anyy more broad than necessary without specifics use cases

I added a response in #126 :)

We do not want the CJS one. I don't know that we really need a .mjs extension either, but if this is a difficult limitation for a packaging tool we can add .mjs if we also add a component that works like this to make sure we don't regress the behavior.

If you'd like to use packem to build convex components, would you consider adding the ability to produce .js files for ESM-only builds of a package with "type": "module"? e.g. with tsdown, an ESM-only build configured like below produces ESM files with .js extensions. Component definitions are already always ESM, so it's never necessary to distinguish between these.

import { defineConfig } from "tsdown"; export default [ defineConfig({ entry: ["src/index.ts", "src/another.ts"], format: ["cjs", "esm"], dts: { tsconfig: "./tsconfig.json", sourcemap: true, }, }), defineConfig({ entry: ["src/server.ts"], format: ["esm"], dts: { tsconfig: "./tsconfig.json", sourcemap: true, }, }), ];

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T23:08:27Z

npm-packages/convex/src/bundler/index.ts

-  let target = path.resolve(dir, "schema.ts");
-  if (!ctx.fs.exists(target)) {
-    target = path.resolve(dir, "schema.js");
+  const candidates = [


This is fine if we remove .cjs, we never want to bundle a commonjs schema.

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T23:09:41Z

npm-packages/convex/src/bundler/index.ts

-  const authConfigPath = path.resolve(dir, "auth.config.js");
-  const authConfigTsPath = path.resolve(dir, "auth.config.ts");
-  if (ctx.fs.exists(authConfigPath) && ctx.fs.exists(authConfigTsPath)) {
+  const candidates = [


auth.config.ts doesn't exist in components so there's no need to change this

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T23:10:53Z

npm-packages/convex/src/cli/lib/components.ts

@@ -54,19 +54,27 @@ import { Reporter, Span } from "./tracing.js";
 import {
  DEFINITION_FILENAME_JS,
  DEFINITION_FILENAME_TS,
+  DEFINITION_FILENAME_MJS,
+  DEFINITION_FILENAME_CJS,


We do not want the CJS one. I don't know that we really need a .mjs extension either, but if this is a difficult limitation for a packaging tool we can add .mjs if we also add a component that works like this to make sure we don't regress the behavior.

If you'd like to use packem to build convex components, would you consider adding the ability to produce .js files for ESM-only builds of a package with "type": "module"? e.g. with tsdown, an ESM-only build configured like below produces ESM files with .js extensions. Component definitions are already always ESM, so it's never necessary to distinguish between these.

import { defineConfig } from "tsdown"; export default [ defineConfig({ entry: ["src/index.ts", "src/another.ts"], format: ["cjs", "esm"], dts: { tsconfig: "./tsconfig.json", sourcemap: true, }, }), defineConfig({ entry: ["src/server.ts"], format: ["esm"], dts: { tsconfig: "./tsconfig.json", sourcemap: true, }, }), ];

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T23:12:14Z

npm-packages/convex/src/cli/lib/components.ts

-  return componentRootPath;
+
+  // Default fallback to .ts for backward compatibility
+  return path.resolve(path.join(functionsDir, DEFINITION_FILENAME_TS));


this is a behavior change, previously the default was the JS path

thomasballinger · 2025-06-24T23:12:53Z

npm-packages/convex/src/cli/lib/components/definition/bundle.ts

@@ -53,7 +53,7 @@ function componentPlugin({
    name: `convex-${mode === "discover" ? "discover-components" : "bundle-components"}`,
    async setup(build) {
      // This regex can't be really precise since developers could import
-      // "convex.config", "convex.config.js", "convex.config.ts", etc.
+      // "convex.config", "convex.config.mjs", "convex.config.cjs", "convex.config.js", "convex.config.ts", etc.


same as above, throughout the PR remove .cjs

…port - Removed support for .cjs file extension in various components, including bundler and component definitions. - Updated logic to prioritize .js and .ts extensions for configuration files. - Adjusted comments and error messages for clarity regarding supported file types.

- Adjusted the priority order for schema and definition file checks to prioritize .ts over .mjs and .js. - Removed references to .d.cts files in the DTS file collection logic to streamline the process. - Updated comments for clarity regarding the new priority order.

prisis · 2025-06-25T19:58:18Z

So i did remove the support for the .cjs and .d.cts, and reverted the order of finding back to "ts", "mjs" "js". :)

It still could be that a .js is a commonjs file. But there is not easy way to check if a file is esm only (i dont know one)

nipunn1313 requested a review from thomasballinger June 24, 2025 17:55

thomasballinger reviewed Jun 24, 2025

View reviewed changes

thomasballinger mentioned this pull request Jun 24, 2025

Support convex.config.[cm]js and convex.config.d.[cm]ts #126

Open

prisis and others added 3 commits June 25, 2025 21:48

Merge branch 'main' into extend-ext

6514726

Merge branch 'main' into extend-ext

75fb94e

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

feat: enhance file resolution logic for Convex #127

feat: enhance file resolution logic for Convex #127

Uh oh!

prisis commented Jun 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

thomasballinger left a comment

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

prisis Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

prisis Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

thomasballinger Jun 24, 2025

Uh oh!

prisis commented Jun 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

feat: enhance file resolution logic for Convex #127

Are you sure you want to change the base?

feat: enhance file resolution logic for Convex #127

Uh oh!

Conversation

prisis commented Jun 24, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

thomasballinger left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

prisis commented Jun 25, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

prisis commented Jun 24, 2025 •

edited

Loading

prisis commented Jun 25, 2025 •

edited

Loading