Report contract wasm size on every CI run - #295
Open
Olamidepy wants to merge 6 commits into
Open
Conversation
…eporting, and web build pipelines
Contributor
Author
|
@Spagero763 kindly merge |
Contributor
|
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Wasm size directly impacts contract deployment costs, but was not previously tracked in CI. This change adds automatic measurement and reporting of the built contract Wasm size (tributary_splitter.wasm) during every CI run.
Changes Made
CI Workflow Update (
ci.yml
):
Scoped the contract job with pull-requests: write and contents: read permissions.
Added a step to measure the built Wasm binary size in both raw bytes and decimal KiB.
Added the formatted size breakdown to the Action run summary ($GITHUB_STEP_SUMMARY).
Added sticky PR commenting (via marocchino/sticky-pull-request-comment@v2) to post and update the size table directly on pull requests.
#91 resolved