Skip to content

feat: get rid of bundle analyzer on by default in prod #646

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

regisb
Copy link
Contributor

@regisb regisb commented Apr 1, 2025

Every run of npm run build generates a report.html file that includes file size stats. It's useless in most cases. We suggest to remove it (along with the dependency) in all MFEs.

This shaves 14s (out of 174s) of the build on my laptop for the learning MFE build.

Every run of `npm run build` generates a report.html file that includes
file size stats. It's useless in most cases. We suggest to remove it
(along with the dependency) in all MFEs.

This shaves 14s (out of 174s) of the build on my laptop for the learning
MFE build.
@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Apr 1, 2025
@openedx-webhooks
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request, @regisb!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/committers-frontend-build.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.
🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads
🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.


Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

@regisb
Copy link
Contributor Author

regisb commented Apr 1, 2025

This is ready for review.

@adamstankiewicz
Copy link
Member

It's useless in most cases.

I personally refer to the generated report.html about production builds often in the MFEs I support to keep an eye on the application's bundle size, find opportunities for code splitting, see which node_modules packages are largest, etc., so I personally wouldn't necessarily say its "useless in most cases." Removing this for all MFEs does not help to encourage the good practice of keeping an eye on and improving bundle size.

That said, I could see the generation of the report perhaps being more an opt-in option when creating a build, e.g. fedx-scripts webpack --create-bundle-report or similar so it doesn't impact CI builds but could still be selectively used during local development.

@regisb
Copy link
Contributor Author

regisb commented Apr 2, 2025

The generation of report.html in production builds has the unfortunate side effect that it's also available on edx.org... See for instance: https://authn.edx.org/report.html

@bradenmacdonald
Copy link
Contributor

+1 for keeping this functionality available (including for prod builds, which can be different than dev builds), as it's very useful - but I agree it shouldn't be on by default.

@itsjeyd itsjeyd added the core contributor PR author is a Core Contributor (who may or may not have write access to this repo). label Apr 10, 2025
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 10, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 0.00%. Comparing base (3c80898) to head (dfa591a).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@      Coverage Diff      @@
##   master   #646   +/-   ##
=============================
=============================

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@itsjeyd itsjeyd moved this from Needs Triage to In Eng Review in Contributions Apr 10, 2025
@itsjeyd itsjeyd added the waiting on author PR author needs to resolve review requests, answer questions, fix tests, etc. label Apr 10, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core contributor PR author is a Core Contributor (who may or may not have write access to this repo). open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U waiting on author PR author needs to resolve review requests, answer questions, fix tests, etc.
Projects
Status: In Eng Review
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants