github-starred/actual
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/actualbudget/actual.git synced 2026-03-10 12:12:39 -05:00
Code Issues 250 Packages Projects Releases 53 Wiki Activity

[PR #2224] [MERGED] Change the vite chunk filename hash usage #4188

New Issue
Closed
opened 2026-02-28 20:52:48 -06:00 by GiteaMirror · 0 comments
GiteaMirror commented 2026-02-28 20:52:48 -06:00
Owner
Copy Link

📋 Pull Request Information

Original PR: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2224
Author: @twk3
Created: 1/13/2024
Status: ✅ Merged
Merged: 1/15/2024
Merged by: @twk3

Base: master ← Head: twk3/fix-vite-chunk-hash

📝 Commits (3)

  • a8151e3 Change the vite chunk filename hash usage
  • 78bb827 Account for chunks being base64wq
  • c09a93f Add release notes

📊 Changes

3 files changed (+13 additions, -3 deletions)

View changed files

📝 .github/workflows/size-compare.yml (+4 -0)
📝 packages/desktop-client/vite.config.mts (+3 -3)
➕ upcoming-release-notes/2224.md (+6 -0)

📄 Description

Summary

  • Change to more closely match the .chunk syntax we use with webpack
  • This should improve an issue with our size compare as well

Details

The improvement for size compare is that our github action is stripping out the hashes before passing the size compare, but was based on the period.

We have the additional difficulty here of rollup using base64 hashes, which can include _- which complicates our ability to just strip out what we want.

This should improve the output, but there likely is a few more tweaks to be made, as our current vite stats seem to be missing the css and font sizes, which were previously present in this action.

Test

Because this action uses pull_request_target only the action from master is run. In order to test the changes here I opened a sibling PR using just pull_reqest.

You can see the test comment here: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2225#issuecomment-1890763133

and if you expand the View detailed bundle breakdown you can see the new naming at work in the Added section vs the current master naming at work in the Removed section.

🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.

## 📋 Pull Request Information **Original PR:** https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2224 **Author:** [@twk3](https://github.com/twk3) **Created:** 1/13/2024 **Status:** ✅ Merged **Merged:** 1/15/2024 **Merged by:** [@twk3](https://github.com/twk3) **Base:** `master` ← **Head:** `twk3/fix-vite-chunk-hash` --- ### 📝 Commits (3) - [`a8151e3`](https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/commit/a8151e34b329615d909194a5a2324602694e6b18) Change the vite chunk filename hash usage - [`78bb827`](https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/commit/78bb8278c81d152f3f3b4fd2781c7b95cd641814) Account for chunks being base64wq - [`c09a93f`](https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/commit/c09a93fcf98a3ef9a77dc600d705e1960fe84e3f) Add release notes ### 📊 Changes **3 files changed** (+13 additions, -3 deletions) <details> <summary>View changed files</summary> 📝 `.github/workflows/size-compare.yml` (+4 -0) 📝 `packages/desktop-client/vite.config.mts` (+3 -3) ➕ `upcoming-release-notes/2224.md` (+6 -0) </details> ### 📄 Description ## Summary - Change to more closely match the `.chunk` syntax we use with webpack - This should improve an issue with our size compare as well ## Details The improvement for size compare is that our github action is stripping out the hashes before passing the size compare, but was based on the period. We have the additional difficulty here of rollup using base64 hashes, which can include `_-` which complicates our ability to just strip out what we want. This should improve the output, but there likely is a few more tweaks to be made, as our current vite stats seem to be missing the css and font sizes, which were previously present in this action. ## Test Because this action uses `pull_request_target` only the action from master is run. In order to test the changes here I opened a sibling PR using just `pull_reqest`. You can see the test comment here: https://github.com/actualbudget/actual/pull/2225#issuecomment-1890763133 and if you expand the `View detailed bundle breakdown` you can see the new naming at work in the `Added` section vs the current master naming at work in the `Removed` section. --- <sub>🔄 This issue represents a GitHub Pull Request. It cannot be merged through Gitea due to API limitations.</sub>
GiteaMirror added the pull-request label 2026-02-28 20:52:48 -06:00
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
AI generated
API
bank sync
budgeting
bug
can’t replicate
dependencies
docker
documentation
electron
experimental feature
feature
feedback
goal templates
good first issue
help wanted
importers
maintenance
needs info
needs testing
needs triage
needs votes
openid
payees
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 regression
reports
responsive
rules
schedules
server
✨ merged
split transactions
tech debt
theme
transaction import
transaction reconciliation
transactions
translations
upstream
user interface
✅ approved
wontfix
No Label pull-request
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
GiteaMirror ninjasurge
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: github-starred/actual#4188
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?