Skip to content

ci: TRAC-1350 fix bundle-size baseline detection for b2b-makeswift - #3155

Open
chanceaclark wants to merge 1 commit into
canaryfrom
chancellorclark/ltrac-1406-fix-bundle-sizeyml-baseline-branch-detection-for
Open

ci: TRAC-1350 fix bundle-size baseline detection for b2b-makeswift#3155
chanceaclark wants to merge 1 commit into
canaryfrom
chancellorclark/ltrac-1406-fix-bundle-sizeyml-baseline-branch-detection-for

Conversation

@chanceaclark

@chanceaclark chanceaclark commented Jul 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Jira: TRAC-1350

What/Why?

.github/workflows/bundle-size.yml's baseline-branch detection only special-cased @bigcommerce/catalyst-makeswift (→ integrations/makeswift); every other package name, including @bigcommerce/catalyst-b2b-makeswift, fell through to canary. Since integrations/b2b-makeswift carries substantial B2B-only code on top of makeswift, comparing its bundle against canary produced a misleading diff on every b2b-makeswift PR.

Adds an elif branch mapping @bigcommerce/catalyst-b2b-makeswiftintegrations/b2b-makeswift, mirroring the existing pattern already used in changesets-release.yml's package-resolution step.

Discovered during the LTRAC-1297 makeswift-upgrade climb; per team policy, landing this fix on canary first, then propagating down through integrations/makeswiftintegrations/b2b-makeswift via the normal sync chain rather than patching it directly on the downstream branch.

Rollout/Rollback

CI-only change, no runtime impact. Revert is a one-line diff if needed.

Testing

Verified the exact bug by re-reading the workflow logic: @bigcommerce/catalyst-b2b-makeswift doesn't match the catalyst-makeswift string check, so it always fell to the else (canary) branch. Confirmed the fix's package name against core/package.json on integrations/b2b-makeswift and confirmed the matching pattern against changesets-release.yml's existing b2b elif.

The baseline-branch detection step only special-cased
@bigcommerce/catalyst-makeswift; every other package name, including
@bigcommerce/catalyst-b2b-makeswift, fell through to canary. Since
integrations/b2b-makeswift carries substantial B2B-only code on top
of makeswift, comparing its bundle against canary produced a
misleading diff on every b2b-makeswift PR.

Add an elif branch mapping @bigcommerce/catalyst-b2b-makeswift to
integrations/b2b-makeswift, mirroring the existing pattern in
changesets-release.yml's package-resolution step.

Refs LTRAC-1406
Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@chanceaclark
chanceaclark requested a review from a team as a code owner July 30, 2026 19:45
@changeset-bot

changeset-bot Bot commented Jul 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

⚠️ No Changeset found

Latest commit: 57f7a48

Merging this PR will not cause a version bump for any packages. If these changes should not result in a new version, you're good to go. If these changes should result in a version bump, you need to add a changeset.

This PR includes no changesets

When changesets are added to this PR, you'll see the packages that this PR includes changesets for and the associated semver types

Click here to learn what changesets are, and how to add one.

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

@vercel

vercel Bot commented Jul 30, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for GitHub.

Project Deployment Actions Updated (UTC)
catalyst Ready Ready Preview Jul 30, 2026 7:46pm

Request Review

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Bundle Size Report

Comparing against baseline from 7a0cdc1 (2026-07-30).

No bundle size changes detected.

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Unlighthouse Performance Comparison — Vercel

Comparing PR preview deployment Unlighthouse scores vs production Unlighthouse scores.

Summary Score

Aggregate score across all categories as reported by Unlighthouse.

Prod Desktop Prod Mobile Preview Desktop Preview Mobile
Score 90 93 92 94

Category Scores

Category Prod Desktop Prod Mobile Preview Desktop Preview Mobile
Performance 76 87 70 79
Accessibility 95 92 95 92
Best Practices 100 100 100 100
SEO 88 100 88 100

Core Web Vitals

Metric Prod Desktop Prod Mobile Preview Desktop Preview Mobile
LCP 3.7 s 4.1 s 5.9 s 5.7 s
CLS 0.001 0 0.037 0
FCP 1.2 s 1.2 s 1.2 s 1.2 s
TBT 0 ms 0 ms 0 ms 30 ms
Max Potential FID 50 ms 40 ms 50 ms 80 ms
Time to Interactive 3.7 s 4.1 s 5.9 s 5.7 s

Full Unlighthouse report →

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant