Hi

Please let me ask a question.

I think your OSS is MIT license ( https://github.com/hughsk/envify/blob/master/package.json#L17 ), but I could not find full license text file in your repo.(like : http://opensource.org/licenses/MIT )

So, I would like to confirm this repo is under the MIT license??

I've been trying to use envify and it works great for the environment variables I actually put in.

However, any environment variables I fail to put in are left untouched. It would be nice if they were replaces with undefined, as the code very often depends on that behavior.

In particular I'm dealing with something like this

module.exports = {
  hostname: process.env.HOSTNAME || 'http://example.com'
};

right now if the HOSTNAME environment variable is not set this code is left untouched. It would be nice if this was transformed to:

module.exports = {
  hostname: undefined || 'http://example.com'
};

as that is the correct behavior. Thanks.

Hello, I can't run envify from node_modules/.bin folder. Throwing this error. Can you please take a look what might be wrong

Error: Unexpected object exported by the "/home/user/Code/frontend/node_modules/.bin/envify" package. Expected a transform function.
    at nr (/home/user/Code/frontend/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:291:27)
    at onfile (/home/user/Code/frontend/node_modules/resolve/lib/async.js:51:21)
    at onex (/home/user/Code/frontend/node_modules/resolve/lib/async.js:93:22)
    at /home/user/Code/frontend/node_modules/resolve/lib/async.js:24:18
    at FSReqWrap.oncomplete (fs.js:123:15)

Here is how to reproduce

npm init -y
npm i --save envify browserify
touch app.js
./node_modules/.bin/browserify app.js -t ./node_modules/.bin/envify > bundle.js

Right now envify processes files of all extensions, except for .json.

I'm in a situation where I'm requiring files of different extensions (.html to load template strings, .tag for RiotJS tag files), and I need envify to apply only to .js, and ignore those files.

I think this could be added in a pretty-backwards-compatible way:

If the env property is not an object, the current behavior is assumed:

envify({
  _: 'purge',
  BUTTS: 'YES',
  env: 'PRODUCTION'
})

If the env property is an object, its properties are used as the environment variables, and the rest of the top-level object is used for options like purge and extensions:

envify({
  purge: true,
  extensions: ['.js', '.mjs'],
  env: {
    BUTTS: 'YES',
    env: 'PRODUCTION'
  }
})

What do you think? Would you take a pull request implementing this change? Would you prefer a different implementation, or would you rather not support different extensions?

There is a way to use without including the object process.env (like webpack define plugin work)?

So I can write something like this:

if( PRODUCTION ) {  }

I'm probably doing something wrong, whenever I call envify my cli throws. Could you help me out?

task.js:

/**
 * Compile JS
 */

gulp.task('modules', function() {
  browserify(__dirname + '/client/modules/index/index.js')
    .transform(envify({NODE_ENV: process.env.NODE_ENV}))
    .transform({global: true}, 'uglifyify')
    .bundle({debug: true})
    .pipe(source('build.js'))
    .pipe(gulp.dest(__dirname + '/build/'));
});

cli error:

❯ versity build
/home/yoshua/Code/versity
[17:40:14] Starting 'styles'...
[17:40:14] Finished 'styles' after 16 ms
[17:40:14] Starting 'modules'...
[17:40:14] Finished 'modules' after 9.79 ms
[17:40:14] Starting 'assets'...
[17:40:14] Finished 'assets' after 785 μs
[17:40:14] Starting 'default'...
[17:40:14] Finished 'default' after 52 μs
/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/index.js:372
        return function (file) { return t.call(this, file, opts) };
                                          ^
TypeError: Object #<Stream> has no method 'call'
    at /home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/index.js:372:43
    at makeTransform (/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:209:21)
    at /home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:186:9
    at Deps.getTransforms (/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:191:7)
    at Deps.readFile (/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:164:25)
    at /home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:280:14
    at onresolve (/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/module-deps/index.js:150:14)
    at /home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/index.js:737:13
    at next (/home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/index.js:781:17)
    at /home/yoshua/Code/versity/node_modules/browserify/index.js:785:33

Hello.

I would like to know plans on updating dependencies as react.js guys deprecate jstransform and esprima-fb (https://facebook.github.io/react/blog/2015/06/12/deprecating-jstransform-and-react-tools.html)

Thanks.

I created test case here: https://github.com/boccob/envify/tree/env-override

Hello,

Thanks for a great lib. Any idea how to pass the "purge" option to envify in package.json config? For example, I thought this would work:

"browserify": {
  "transform": [["envify", "purge"]]
}

Or this:

"browserify": {
  "transform": [["envify", { "purge": true }]]
}

But neither seem to work. Any suggestions?

Thanks!

Everything is fine if you don't use global transform in browserify. But if you need it, envify will use in dependencies environment variables instead of specified in parameters.

I created very small example here: https://github.com/boccob/envify-test
Just npm install && npm run build. And then search staging in build.js.

browserify: {
            debug: true,
            transform: [
                'babelify',
                ['envify', 'browserify-istanbul', { instrumenter: require('isparta') }]
            ]
        }

I tried somenthing like this but i got an error:
node_modules/karma-browserify/node_modules/browserify/index.js:313 opts._flags = '_flags' in opts ? opts._flags : self._options;Cannot use 'in' operator to search for '_flags' in envify

am i missing some configuration?

This is odd.

If I do:

browserify -t envify entrypoint.js

it will work.

However, if I do:
browserify('entrypoint.js').transform(require('envify')()).bundle()

browserify will crash with:

Unable to build /home/user/scripto2/src/static/js/entrypoint.js path must be a string Error: path must be a string
        at /home/user/scripto2/node_modules/browserify/node_modules/resolve/lib/async.js:16:16
        at doNTCallback0 (node.js:407:9)
        at process._tickDomainCallback (node.js:377:13) { err:
       { [Error: path must be a string]
         stream:
          Labeled {
            _readableState: [Object],
            readable: true,
            domain: null,
            _events: [Object],
            _eventsCount: 4,
            _maxListeners: undefined,
            _writableState: [Object],
            writable: true,
            allowHalfOpen: true,
            _options: [Object],
            _wrapOptions: [Object],
            _streams: [Object],
            length: 1,
            label: 'deps' } } }

If I remove the .transform call everything works correctly.

browserify 10.2.6 (as well as 11.0.1)
envify 3.4.0

I've created a simple test case here: https://github.com/toddself/envify-example

if you do node bundle.js you'll see the error. if you remove the call to .transform it'll work. (it doesn't matter if you put envify in the .transform call or in the transform keys in package.json -- they both fail). However, if you do node_modules/.bin/browserify -t envify entrypoint.js it'll work...

Hi! You depend on through, an excellent package that unfortunately has not been maintained since 2018. I've forked it as https://npmjs.com/@ljharb/through so that I can maintain it (with @dominictarr's blessing), and am using it in https://npmjs.com/tape.

Would you be interested in a PR that switches this project to using my fork instead of the original? It's effectively identical, but it'd ensure any vulnerabilities will be addressed in the future.

After using Envify as a Browserify's transform I still can see something like var env = process.env.NODE_ENV || 'development'; in my code. Is it correct behavior or am I doing something wrong?

I have this in my gulpfile.js

elixir(function(mix) {
   mix.browserify(['app.jsx'], 'public/js/app.js');
});

How can I add envify so I could use env variables in my app.jsx ?
Thanks

Let's say I'd rather not pollute my process.env. Is there a way to specify my own, custom, object to be operated on?

I have a use case where I would like environment variable definitions to override properties to envify, the default values of which would be contained in the package.json file. Something like this:

  "scripts" {
    "build-yes": "MY_VAR=YES browserify .",
    "build": "browserify ."
  },
  "browserify": {
    "transform": [
      "babelify",
      "browserify-shim",
      [
        "envify",
        {
          "MY_VAR": "NO"
        }
      ]
    ]
  }

Unfortunately, the re-definition derived from the script "build-yes" does not take place. Removing the definition of "MY_VAR":"NO" in the package is the only way for "MY_VAR=YES" to reach the transform. Is this the desired behaviour? Could these priorities be reconsidered?

I've trouble getting the envify/custom version working. The following code bundles without errors, but still contains process.env.NODE_ENV. Nothing has been replaced:

const envify = require('envify/custom')

/* browserify() */.transform(envify({

	NODE_ENV: 'production'

}))/* .bundle() */

The normal module however works fine.

const envify = require('envify')

process.env.NODE_ENV = 'production'

/* browserify() */.transform(envify)/* .bundle() */

Is there a difference between setting process.env.NODE_ENV = 'production' and passing NODE_ENV: 'production' to the custom module?

Node v6.7.0
envify v4.0.0

All tests are passing on my setup.

I've run across an issue in transform declaration syntax. The following, using a method, does not work for setting the NODE_ENV:

var b = browserify({
    'cache': {},
    'packageCache': {},
    'fullPaths': true,
    'entries': [paths.jsPath + (argv.path === 'background' ? paths.background : paths.main) + '.js'],
    'noParse': ['react.js', 'jquery.js', 'pdf.combined.js'],
    'transform': [reactify]
  })
  .transform('brfs', { global: true })
  .transform(envify({
    global: true,
    _: 'purge',
    NODE_ENV: 'production'
  }))

However, the following does, calling envify in the transform array:

var b = browserify({
    'cache': {},
    'packageCache': {},
    'fullPaths': true,
    'entries': [paths.jsPath + (argv.path === 'background' ? paths.background : paths.main) + '.js'],
    'noParse': ['react.js', 'jquery.js', 'pdf.combined.js'],
    'transform': [[reactify], ['envify', {'global': true, '_': 'purge', NODE_ENV: 'production'}]]
  })
  .transform('brfs', { global: true })

I don't know the difference, or why one works and not the other. Calling NODE_ENV=production gulp also works, regardless of declaration of envify in the gulp file.

Oops - I submitted this to the wrong thing sorry!

I'm using Browserify, and when I minified JS code with using React and Redux, it saids:

Warning: It looks like you're using a minified copy of the development build of React. When deploying React apps to production, make sure to use the production build which skips development warnings and is faster. See https://fb.me/react-minification for more details.

You are currently using minified code outside of NODE_ENV === 'production'. This means that you are running a slower development build of Redux. You can use loose-envify (https://github.com/zertosh/loose-envify) for browserify or DefinePlugin for webpack (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30030031) to ensure you have the correct code for your production build.

So I added envify and used like this:

const vendors = [
	'connected-react-router', 
	'history', 
	'immutable', 
	'isomorphic-fetch', 
	'moment', 
	'react', 
	'react-dom', 
	'react-if', 
	'react-motion-ui-pack', 
	'react-redux', 
	'react-router', 
	'redux'
];
const isProduction = config.isProduction;

function buildVendor() {
	const b = persistify({ debug: !isProduction });

	vendors.forEach(vendor => {
		b.require(vendor);
	});

	if(isProduction) {
		console.log('envify');
		b.transform(envify({
			NODE_ENV: 'production'
		}));
	}

	let stream =  b.bundle()
	.on('error', swallowError)
	.pipe(source('vendor.js'))
	.pipe(buffer())
	.pipe(rename('vendor.js'));

	if(isProduction) {
		stream.pipe(uglify());
	}

	return stream.pipe(gulp.dest(`${DIST}/js`));
}

You can see that when it's production mode, it calls envify, also I printed "envify" on the console when it runs.

After run the browserify(with gulp), it saids 'envify':

[ec2-user@ip-172-31-22-2 modernator-2]$ gulp build --all
[11:58:05] Using gulpfile ~/modernator-2/gulpfile.js
[11:58:05] Starting 'build'...
envify    <-- ENVIFY CALLED
[11:58:05] Moving external resources done. (Time elapsed 27ms.)
[11:58:05] Building HTML done. (Time elapsed 431ms.)
[11:58:05] Compiling SCSS done. (Time elapsed 99ms.)
[11:58:06] 826520 bytes written (1.12 seconds)
[11:58:16] Moving images done. (Time elapsed 11007ms.)
[11:58:16] Finished 'build' after 11 s

But still same errors on the webbrowser's console:

Warning: It looks like you're using a minified copy of the development build of React. When deploying React apps to production, make sure to use the production build which skips development warnings and is faster. See https://fb.me/react-minification for more details.

You are currently using minified code outside of NODE_ENV === 'production'. This means that you are running a slower development build of Redux. You can use loose-envify (https://github.com/zertosh/loose-envify) for browserify or DefinePlugin for webpack (http://stackoverflow.com/questions/30030031) to ensure you have the correct code for your production build.

I'm running multiple node services on single server, so I can't set NODE_ENV to production, because some of them are still in development mode. Is there a something that I missed? Why it won't worked at all?

I'm using

• node v.6.9.5
• envify v4.0.0
• browserify v7.3.0

Example in the wild: https://github.com/petkaantonov/bluebird/blob/261b65805a71deaf37ad48b3cacb71ab7cedd97a/src/debuggability.js#L12

This is something between a question and an issue, since I am not sure how it should work.

I have in the code

var version = process.env.npm_package_version

and I would expect envify to replace this with the npm package version. But it doesn't.

It took me a while to get the envify purge option right inside the package.json.

I'm just posting it here for reference.

  "browserify": {
    "transform": [
      ["brfs"],
      ["envify", {"_": "purge"}]
    ]
  },

note: brfs is not needed, it's just showing how to add several transforms.

do you really mean this?

if ("production" === "development") {
  console.log('development only')
}

I ran into #7 again today, which made me wonder if we might improve the default behavior or envify.

Instead of having to choose between require('envify') and require('envify/custom') this behavior might be more intuitive.

var envify = require('envify');

// detects the process.env.NODE_ENV variable
browserify()
  .transform(envify())

// manually override the environment
browserify()
   .transform(envify({env: 'custom'});

Let me know what you think, if you approve I'll PR the changes.

I'm trying to use this transform on a project, but the transform doesn't seem to be replacing the environment variables within a library (specifically React, but I don't know if that makes a difference here).

To reproduce:

mkdir eg
cd eg

npm install -g browserify
npm install react envify
echo "require('react');" > file.js

# This ought to return no results, but it does
browserify -t [ envify --NODE_ENV production ] file.js | grep NODE_ENV

My app is Containerized inside of Docker. I am using gulp to build my client side app. In order to ensure that the client bundle is ready to go when the container starts I run my gulp build via the Dockerfile.

For some reason when the build run via the Docker file, everything builds just fine, but envify has no impact on the build. None of the process.env references are replaced. However, if I open a shell into the container after it has started, and then re-run gulp build, envify takes effect.

I have analized the bundles created before and after the second run of gulp build, and browserify is definitely running and other transforms are executed in both cases. It just seems that envify is not running when triggered by the Docker build.

Any ideas what could be causing this? Does envify depend on some kind of shell state (since it works when I run via a shell command, but not when the run happens automatically via the Docker build)?

I don't know if this is intended, but say the environment variable NODE_ENV is not defined in my shell, then the transform leaves process.env.NODE_ENV as-is, which raises an error because process is not defined.

Maybe replace process.env.NODE_ENV with undefined instead?

Just following a thread here, not sure if it's possible or not.

As noted in browserify/browserify#377 browserify uses static analysis to figure out what to build.

I'm working on a network of sites where we want to include different config for each property, where the property is identified by an environment variable.

That means we have a config file that looks like this:

if (process.env.SITE_KEY === 'site1') {
    module.exports = require('./site1');
} else if (process.env.SITE_KEY === 'site2') {
    module.exports = require('./site2');
}

Any other module that wants to know something in the site config requires this one.

The problem is that all site configs are bundled into each site's build, even though only the active one is used. Not really a huge issue, but it's not a clean solution either.

It seems like it might be possible to hook envify into the browserify pipeline in a way that replaces environment variables before require statements are evaluated, which would allow the following:

module.exports = require('./' + process.env.SITE_KEY);

If we could rewrite that with envify before browserify goes looking for require statements, it would see:

module.exports = require('./site1');

Any ideas on whether that's possible / feasible? Or do you know of any other ways to achieve this? I went looking but didn't find anything.

I've submitted this PR facebookarchive/jstransform#29. If that gets merged then it's possible to simplify the dependencies so that there isn't a case of multiple esprima-fb versions as described in the PR's comment.

I'd be more than happy to submit a PR that basically does this when the time is right:

diff --git a/package.json b/package.json
index fcfc0a6a..a01af729 100644
--- a/package.json
+++ b/package.json
@@ -21,8 +21,7 @@
   "dependencies": {
     "xtend": "~2.1.2",
     "through": "~2.3.4",
-    "esprima-fb": "^4001.3001.0-dev-harmony-fb",
-    "jstransform": "^6.1.0"
+    "jstransform": "WHATEVER_VERSION_IS_NEXT"
   },
   "keywords": [
     "environment",
diff --git a/visitors.js b/visitors.js
index 48cb1548..e93848f6 100644
--- a/visitors.js
+++ b/visitors.js
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
-var Syntax = require('esprima-fb').Syntax
 var utils = require('jstransform/src/utils')
+var Syntax = utils.Syntax

 function create(envs) {

Greetings - I noticed that the package.json file states a license of MIT, yet no license file was found in the repository. To make it clearer and easier for the downstream users to identify the license, would you mind adding an MIT license (https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT) to the source tree? Let me know if you would like me to make a pull request with the license text.

Thanks,
Gary

So i have some files symlinked into node_modules more on it here.

That way i can require('myServices/service'); instead of require('../../../myServices/service')

Unfortunately if i have something like process.env.MY_VAR inside that file (service.js) it will not be transformed.

Any thoughts or suggestions?

This is not an issue as much as a support question. But I couldn't find another forum.

My environment variables are not being replaced when running the following in my universal reactapp:

const envify = require('envify/custom');

// function declarations etc
  browserify()
    .transform(
      babelify.configure({
        ignore: [/(bower_components)|(node_modules)/]
      })
    )
    .transform(envify(process.env))
    .bundle()
    .on('error', handleError)
    .pipe(source('app.js'))
    .pipe(buffer())
    .pipe(gulpif(globalSettings.production, stripDebug()))
    .pipe(gulpif(globalSettings.production, uglify()))
    .pipe(gulp.dest(taskSettings.scripts.dest));

It works locally, but not in my staging environment where the server shows the correct stuff based on env, but is then being replaced by client hydration.

I've described my problem in more detail in this StackOverflow question: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55594832/envify-not-replacing-my-environment-variables

Grateful for any help!

I'm not sure if there is already an option for this, but if not, it would be nice if we could choose to have the build error when trying to replace process.env.WHATEVER if the variable is not defined (falsey?).

Similar to https://webpack.js.org/plugins/environment-plugin/

If an environment variable is not found during bundling and no default value was provided, webpack will throw an error instead of a warning.

npm ERR! peerinvalid The package envify does not satisfy its siblings' peerDependencies requirements!

Happens when I am trying out the flux example
package.json contents:

 "devDependencies": {
        "jsxc": "~0.1.6",
        "browserify" : "^6.2.0",
        "reactify": "^0.15.2",
        "envify": "3.2.0",
        "jest-cli": "~0.1.17",
        "uglify-js": "~2.4.15",
        "watchify": "^2.1.1"
    },
    "scripts": {
        "start": "watchify -o js/bundle.js -v -d .",
        "build": "NODE_ENV=production browserify . | uglifyjs -cm > js/bundle.min.js",
        "test": "jest"
    },
    "browserify": {
        "transform": [
            "reactify",
            "envify"
        ]
    },

Would be lovely, if envify supported setting env variables from the file (e.g. .env):

$ envify -f .env

.env:

VAR1=abc
VAR2=cba

Real use case: storing API keys for some services (e.g. MapBox) in .env file and wanting to replace process.env.API_KEY in code with those values.

It took me about 2 hours of debugging to release this, but when you think about how envify works, it makes sense. I was using object destructuring to cut down on some boilerplate, which works fine in node:

const {
  VAR_A,
  VAR_B,
  VAR_C
} = process.env

And none of them were being set. So I added a console.log(process.env) beneath it, which output {}, and that made me think envify wasn't being executed at all. Of course it's because envify is parsing the file looking for process.env.SOMETHINGHERE literally.

It would be nice if object destructuring were supported, though I can understand why it would be challenging, and accessing process.env would almost always be a mistake (except for debugging). Perhaps the solution here is just to make this more clear in the readme, that this module doesn't actually provide a process.env object; it basically just does string replacing?

The base62 module phone google analytics on each install (!!)
It's a dependencies of jstransform (un-maintained), is there a way to get around this ?

It's a big privacy issue for us https://github.com/andrew/base62.js/blob/master/package.json#L27