+middleware example with @universal-middleware/router

[magne4000]

WIP around how we can move some logic used in +middleware.ts process to universal-middleware.

@brillout This is mostly to discuss what we should port to universal-middleware and create a proper API.

universal-middleware in progress PR: magne4000/universal-middleware#95

[magne4000]

This could be moved to vike-node, which would be responsible to create the proper Universal*Router.

[brillout]

👍 And eventually vike-{express,hono,...} so that one Vike extension = one tool (e.g. to fit the text next to the landing page's slot machine).

[brillout]

Btw. I'm currently working on the Vike CLI and one neat thing we could eventually do is to have vike-express have a built-in Express.js server boilerplate, so that the user doesn't have to write a single line of server code (but the user can eject that server boilerplate if he needs to).

[magne4000]

It should be simple enough, and I like the idea.
I can see that in Bati we would then just add a comment somewhere or a paragraph in the README to explain that it can be ejected.
We could even allow the user to retrieve the built-in express like this:

import { app } from "vike-express";

[brillout]

👍

We could even allow the user to retrieve the built-in express like this:

Neat idea ✨

[brillout]

I wonder whether/how we can add a name to a universal middleware, so that users can selectively remove middlewares.

Use case: user is using vike-react-authjs but wants a custom server integration. The answer could be that he has to fully eject vike-react-authjs or he replaces the universal middleware with a custom middleware. I guess both are okay, although if it's easy to implement then it would be nice to have some kind of name or other means to select a universal middleware.

[magne4000]

I wonder whether/how we can add a name to a universal middleware, so that users can selectively remove middlewares.

Use case: user is using vike-react-authjs but wants a custom server integration. The answer could be that he has to fully eject vike-react-authjs or he replaces the universal middleware with a custom middleware. I guess both are okay, although if it's easy to implement then it would be nice to have some kind of name or other means to select a universal middleware.

I was thinking about that with the same use case in mind. IMO the best solution would be to be able to just eject the +middleware, but I think we're not there yet.
So adding a name onto them could do the trick for now (and it doesn't hurt).

[brillout]

Yea, I think a name is always a good thing to have. I'm just wondering how it could fit with the current DX with withRoute() and withOrder(). Maybe merging these into a single withMeta() could do the trick. Actually, I feel like naming that it withRoute() instead of withMeta() could be a better name. We could then require a name when using withRoute() (and iff. using withRoute() because in the user land setting a name isn't that useful I guess).

[magne4000]

Some documentation around the enhance and apply helpers: https://d80b2041.universal-middleware.pages.dev/helpers/enhance (PR: magne4000/universal-middleware#97)

[brillout]

Neat 😍