Add support for ignoring .env files with # WRANGLER_IGNORE comment

[dario-piotrowicz]

This PR adds support for ignoring .env files with # WRANGLER_IGNORE comment

---

• Tests
  • Tests included/updated
  • Automated tests not possible - manual testing has been completed as follows:
  • Additional testing not necessary because:
• Public documentation
  • Cloudflare docs PR(s): Add documentation on how to make wrangler ignore .env files cloudflare-docs#28715
  • Documentation not necessary because:

A picture of a cute animal (not mandatory, but encouraged)

---

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: b5323bb

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

✅ All changesets look good

[pkg-pr-new]

create-cloudflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/create-cloudflare@12724

@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/kv-asset-handler@12724

miniflare

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/miniflare@12724

@cloudflare/pages-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/pages-shared@12724

@cloudflare/unenv-preset

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/unenv-preset@12724

@cloudflare/vite-plugin

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vite-plugin@12724

@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/vitest-pool-workers@12724

@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/@cloudflare/workers-editor-shared@12724

wrangler

npm i https://pkg.pr.new/wrangler@12724

commit: b1b363d

[devin-ai-integration]

✅ Devin Review: No Issues Found

Devin Review analyzed this PR and found no potential bugs to report.

View in Devin Review to see 5 additional findings.

[petebacondarwin]

Will the Cloudflare vite-plugin generate a .env that contains this comment or is it up to the user to add it? Will then know when it is necessary? Is there an issue related to this?

[petebacondarwin]

Suggested change

	logger.info(
	logger.debug(

Note that we have a silent parameter that suggests that we should not be outputting logs when true.

So if you do want to use logger.log here, you should wrap it in a if (!silent) block.

[dario-piotrowicz]

if (!silent) added 🫡

b5323bb

[jamesopstad]

I removed my approval because I've thought about it a bit more and I'm less sure this is a good idea. For one, WRANGLER_IGNORE comment is confusing because the files will still be read by Wrangler in development. But also, I'm wondering why users can't just use different names for environment variables that they don't want to be read at deploy time?

[petebacondarwin]

I removed my approval because I've thought about it a bit more and I'm less sure this is a good idea. For one, WRANGLER_IGNORE comment is confusing because the files will still be read by Wrangler in development. But also, I'm wondering why users can't just use different names for environment variables that they don't want to be read at deploy time?

I'm glad you are thinking about this more. I felt uncomfortable about it as a solution but couldn't put my finger on why so didn't want to block.

[dario-piotrowicz]

I removed my approval because I've thought about it a bit more and I'm less sure this is a good idea. For one, WRANGLER_IGNORE comment is confusing because the files will still be read by Wrangler in development.

No it doesn't, this change applies across the board, so it applies to wrangler dev as well

But also, I'm wondering why users can't just use different names for environment variables that they don't want to be read at deploy time?

They sure can and that's a valid comment here, however I'd like to push back saying that asking users to work around these sort of thing is not a great DX. In my opinion it would be a much nicer DX for them if they could be allowed to tell wrangler not to use .env files when they don't want it to. Without this, the alternative for a user would be to make sure that they don't use any of the already-reserved variable names, which again is totally possible and not a huge deal, but also not an ideal DX in my opinion

[jamesopstad]

I removed my approval because I've thought about it a bit more and I'm less sure this is a good idea. For one, WRANGLER_IGNORE comment is confusing because the files will still be read by Wrangler in development.

No it doesn't, this change applies across the board, so it applies to wrangler dev as well

Ah, I hadn't appreciated that it's the same loadDotEnv function that gets used in getVarsForDev. That's arguably more problematic though, because it means this WRANGLER_IGNORE comment also applies to reading secrets from .env files when using Vite.