Invisible Rewrites (mod_rewrite) - Asset Manager uses the pre-rewritten path to resolve

[mtudor]

Hi guys, looking for a bit of input on this one please. We've just implemented a cache busting module which adds a rewrite rule to catch paths of the format (for example) /my/path/myfile.XX.XX.XX.js (where XX.XX.XX is a version number) and invisibly rewrite these to /my/path/myfile.js.

We are using the PathStackResolver, and AssetManager attempts to locate an asset with the pre-rewritten name including the version number. This doesn't find anything and the file access fails. My initial thought was whether AssetManager should actually be using the REDIRECT_URL parameter to grab the post-rewritten name excluding the version number? For example, this change:

https://github.com/RWOverdijk/AssetManager/blob/master/src/AssetManager/Service/AssetManager.php#L194

$fullPath   = $request->getServer('REDIRECT_URL') ?: $uri->getPath();

My concerns:

• the reliability of REDIRECT_URL (possibly semi-negated by a $uri->getPath() fallback?).
• whether there are circumstances you would actually want the pre-rewritten url, possibly in resolvers that are not path related.

I've been talking in terms of cache-busting and version numbers but of course this would apply to any invisible rewrite situation... Appreciate your thoughts!

[RWOverdijk]

Why won't you just name the file myfile.xx.xx.xx.js?

Anyway, that's a valid question. You could rewrite the path before it hits AssetManager, using the same logic as your rewrite rule.

[mtudor]

Hi Wesley, thanks for the response. The version numbering is automatically applied through an extension to headScript and headLink, which pulls the current release version from a config file updated by our build script. Renaming wouldn't be practical as we're doing it for every js / css file in the repository.

So, rewriting the path before it hits AssetManager - would you be thinking we do that within a small ZF2 module; changing the value in $uri->getPath()? Or did you have something else in mind?

Do you think that AssetManager should examine the content of REDIRECT_URL in order to cater for an invisible rewrite? That would either be a case of assuming that the resolver will always want the rewritten url if it exists, and passing that in as I outlined in my last comment, passing both urls in, or passing the whole Request object to the resolver and allowing it to handle as appropriate. Any thoughts?