[No QA] ci: Add Sentry build size analysis by rinej · Pull Request #82952 · Expensify/App

rinej · 2026-02-19T15:41:08Z

Explanation of Change

Uploads Android and iOS AdHoc builds to Sentry for size analysis after the Rock Remote Build step
Uses the ARTIFACT_PATH env var set by the Rock actions:
Android:
https://github.com/callstackincubator/android/blob/4cedf4d9b5c167452c96fe67233577e0fde9a025/action.yml#L274
iOS:
https://github.com/callstackincubator/ios/blob/dd30f7e53eee2ea6a59509793d0a30fbb5c91216/action.yml#L372

Fixed Issues

$ #82850
PROPOSAL:

Tests

Trigger a test build via testBuild.yml from this branch
Verify the Sentry upload steps appear in the GitHub Actions logs for both Android and iOS jobs
Confirm builds succeded
Check Sentry dashboard for AdHoc build size data

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

I linked the correct issue in the ### Fixed Issues section above
I wrote clear testing steps that cover the changes made in this PR
- I added steps for local testing in the Tests section
- I added steps for the expected offline behavior in the Offline steps section
- I added steps for Staging and/or Production testing in the QA steps section
- I added steps to cover failure scenarios (i.e. verify an input displays the correct error message if the entered data is not correct)
- I turned off my network connection and tested it while offline to ensure it matches the expected behavior (i.e. verify the default avatar icon is displayed if app is offline)
- I tested this PR with a High Traffic account against the staging or production API to ensure there are no regressions (e.g. long loading states that impact usability).
I included screenshots or videos for tests on all platforms
I ran the tests on all platforms & verified they passed on:
- Android: Native
- Android: mWeb Chrome
- iOS: Native
- iOS: mWeb Safari
- MacOS: Chrome / Safari
I verified there are no console errors (if there's a console error not related to the PR, report it or open an issue for it to be fixed)
I verified there are no new alerts related to the canBeMissing param for useOnyx
I followed proper code patterns (see Reviewing the code)
- I verified that any callback methods that were added or modified are named for what the method does and never what callback they handle (i.e. toggleReport and not onIconClick)
- I verified that comments were added to code that is not self explanatory
- I verified that any new or modified comments were clear, correct English, and explained "why" the code was doing something instead of only explaining "what" the code was doing.
- I verified any copy / text shown in the product is localized by adding it to src/languages/* files and using the translation method
  - If any non-english text was added/modified, I used JaimeGPT to get English > Spanish translation. I then posted it in #expensify-open-source and it was approved by an internal Expensify engineer. Link to Slack message:
- I verified all numbers, amounts, dates and phone numbers shown in the product are using the localization methods
- I verified any copy / text that was added to the app is grammatically correct in English. It adheres to proper capitalization guidelines (note: only the first word of header/labels should be capitalized), and is either coming verbatim from figma or has been approved by marketing (in order to get marketing approval, ask the Bug Zero team member to add the Waiting for copy label to the issue)
- I verified proper file naming conventions were followed for any new files or renamed files. All non-platform specific files are named after what they export and are not named "index.js". All platform-specific files are named for the platform the code supports as outlined in the README.
- I verified the JSDocs style guidelines (in STYLE.md) were followed
If a new code pattern is added I verified it was agreed to be used by multiple Expensify engineers
I followed the guidelines as stated in the Review Guidelines
I tested other components that can be impacted by my changes (i.e. if the PR modifies a shared library or component like Avatar, I verified the components using Avatar are working as expected)
I verified all code is DRY (the PR doesn't include any logic written more than once, with the exception of tests)
I verified any variables that can be defined as constants (ie. in CONST.ts or at the top of the file that uses the constant) are defined as such
I verified that if a function's arguments changed that all usages have also been updated correctly
If any new file was added I verified that:
- The file has a description of what it does and/or why is needed at the top of the file if the code is not self explanatory
If a new CSS style is added I verified that:
- A similar style doesn't already exist
- The style can't be created with an existing StyleUtils function (i.e. StyleUtils.getBackgroundAndBorderStyle(theme.componentBG))
If new assets were added or existing ones were modified, I verified that:
- The assets are optimized and compressed (for SVG files, run npm run compress-svg)
- The assets load correctly across all supported platforms.
If the PR modifies code that runs when editing or sending messages, I tested and verified there is no unexpected behavior for all supported markdown - URLs, single line code, code blocks, quotes, headings, bold, strikethrough, and italic.
If the PR modifies a generic component, I tested and verified that those changes do not break usages of that component in the rest of the App (i.e. if a shared library or component like Avatar is modified, I verified that Avatar is working as expected in all cases)
If the PR modifies a component related to any of the existing Storybook stories, I tested and verified all stories for that component are still working as expected.
If the PR modifies a component or page that can be accessed by a direct deeplink, I verified that the code functions as expected when the deeplink is used - from a logged in and logged out account.
If the PR modifies the UI (e.g. new buttons, new UI components, changing the padding/spacing/sizing, moving components, etc) or modifies the form input styles:
- I verified that all the inputs inside a form are aligned with each other.
- I added Design label and/or tagged @Expensify/design so the design team can review the changes.
If a new page is added, I verified it's using the ScrollView component to make it scrollable when more elements are added to the page.
I added unit tests for any new feature or bug fix in this PR to help automatically prevent regressions in this user flow.
If the main branch was merged into this PR after a review, I tested again and verified the outcome was still expected according to the Test steps.

Screenshots/Videos

Android: Native

Android: mWeb Chrome

iOS: Native

iOS: mWeb Safari

MacOS: Chrome / Safari

melvin-bot · 2026-02-19T15:42:00Z

@jayeshmangwani Please copy/paste the Reviewer Checklist from here into a new comment on this PR and complete it. If you have the K2 extension, you can simply click: [this button]

roryabraham · 2026-02-19T19:30:48Z

@jayeshmangwani no C+ review needed here

github-actions · 2026-02-19T19:31:34Z

🚧 @roryabraham has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

roryabraham

Ok, looks like this worked for iOS but not Android:
https://expensify.sentry.io/explore/releases/?project=4510228107427840&statsPeriod=24h&tab=mobile-builds

Also, can we add a GitHub workflow annotation (with a ::notice:: log) to link to the uploaded Sentry builds?

Also, NAB --log-level debug is more verbose than I imagined

github-actions · 2026-02-20T11:50:31Z

⚠️ This PR is possibly changing native code and/or updating libraries, it may cause problems with HybridApp. Please check if any patch updates are required in the HybridApp repo and run an AdHoc build to verify that HybridApp will not break. Ask Contributor Plus for help if you are not sure how to handle this. ⚠️

rinej · 2026-02-20T11:54:00Z

Great that we have it for ios. Here is also some useful bundle chart, also the potential savings recommendations looks good -> https://expensify.sentry.io/preprod/size/52159/?project=4510228107427840

For the Android issue, the main problem is that it was uploaded with the error:
“Failed to extract basic app information: Could not load binary manifest for APK”

From the CI logs, we can see that the APK was built and uploaded successfully, and the file size is valid (~174MB).

Most likely, the failure occurs when Sentry tried to parse the binary AndroidManifest.xml.

Sentry recommends using sentry-cli >= 2.58.2 for the build upload command. The workflow was using version 2.58.0 (resolved transitively via @sentry/webpack-plugin), which might be the cause of the issue.

I added @sentry/cli as a direct devDependency (pinned to 3.2.0) in package.json
(If we don't want to add it to package.json, we can install it directly in the workflow, let me know what is prefered)

rinej · 2026-02-20T12:05:04Z

I also added notice logs for better visibility. I know the logs are quite verbose, but once we confirm the flow works as expected, we can remove the --log-level debug flag, before merging to avoid bloating the logs

github-actions · 2026-02-20T18:01:02Z

🚧 @roryabraham has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-02-20T18:27:51Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82952.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-android-Adhoc-99058c0-98deb5d-e750759154b65e05ce9c470cf11be8747e5a521a/index.html	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-99058c0-98deb5d-cc561bc8054a02da3bd0c18c7df57cfb4998bc1a/index.html

Web 🕸️
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Web was skipped

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

roryabraham · 2026-02-20T18:34:27Z

@rinej can we get an actual table with proper hyperlinks like we see in the existing build summary?

roryabraham · 2026-02-20T18:35:27Z

Also, it looks like unfortunately the Android build size analysis failed again

codecov · 2026-02-23T13:17:05Z

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
see 57 files with indirect coverage changes

roryabraham · 2026-02-23T21:12:47Z

What we can do:

We could try to upload the AAB instead of APK, but for it we will need to run another build step

./gradlew bundleAdhoc which will add the couple of minutes to the build (~10min). Not sure hovwer if it will work easyliy with out adhoc-rock build

Report it to the Sentry - since the docs claim APK is supported, this manifest parsing failure looks like a bug.

Let's do both!

rinej · 2026-02-24T13:59:05Z

Ok, I updated the PR to build AAB using Rock - with that we can test if that was the main issue with Sentry.
Could you trigger the adhoc?

I also adjusted the refactor with splitting the Sentry upload logic into separate buildAndroid and buildIOS files.

there might be an issue with downloading adhoc builds in AAB format for adhoc, but let's first verify if this fixes the main issue with Sentry. If yes, we can add conversion

roryabraham · 2026-02-24T20:11:12Z

@rinej happy to run another AdHoc build, but I wanted to also point out #83268 to you - I was planning to decouple sentry uploads from iOS/Android native builds and move them into their own callable workflow, which would potentially centralize some of your changes here

github-actions · 2026-02-24T20:15:53Z

🚧 @roryabraham has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-02-24T20:49:16Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82952 Mobile-Expensify PR Expensify/Mobile-Expensify#82937.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-043541a-87fa108-170358fe108bb5867cb9e24505cc3d2efa80fa33/index.html

Web 🕸️
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Web was skipped

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

rinej · 2026-02-25T14:10:39Z

The upload was successful, so the issue is with Sentry parsing APK for android. When uploaded AAB it worked fine.
iOS -> https://expensify.sentry.io/preprod/size/58165/?project=4510228107427840
Android -> https://expensify.sentry.io/preprod/size/58157/?project=4510228107427840

For release we upload AAB by default so no additional changed there are needed, with that tested I think we can proceed with the release upload from that PR -> #82937
@roryabraham could you merge it and and cherry-pick to staging?

For add-hocs we need to find another solution, cause we need APK so it is easier to download and install on testing devices.

rinej · 2026-02-25T16:00:53Z

For the adhocs, the only solution I have for now is to keep the Rock build with the APK as it is (we need the APK for the S3 upload). And add another step to build the AAB. It adds some extra build time, but when Rock uses the cache build, it shouldn’t take too long. We can remove this extra step once Sentry fixes the APK parsing

roryabraham · 2026-02-26T17:38:14Z

I think short term that's ok. I posted further thoughts in the #expert-contributors slack room here

roryabraham

Can you please combine #82937 into this PR and close that other one? I've lost sight of why they're separate and I think I'd have a clearer picture of the changes if they were combined.

…-adhoc-size-analysis

roryabraham · 2026-02-27T16:20:23Z

.github/workflows/buildAndroid.yml

+        if: ${{ inputs.variant == 'Adhoc' }}
+        run: echo "ARTIFACT_URL=$ARTIFACT_URL" >> "$GITHUB_OUTPUT"
+
+      - name: Rock Remote Build - Android AAB (Sentry size analysis, AAB format is required)


Rather than building an .aab separately, can we just try always building an .aab in the rock action above? I looked at the source code and bit and it suggests we should be able to distribute AdHoc builds with .aab just fine: https://github.com/callstackincubator/android/blob/4cedf4d9b5c167452c96fe67233577e0fde9a025/action.yml#L387-L394

Then we can convert the .aab into an .apk below (we already do that). and we can upload the .aab from the main build into Sentry

That was my initial thought, but I was pretty sure that for aab for adhocs we won't be able to easily download and install the app. But lets verify it, I added the change

github-actions · 2026-02-27T21:18:46Z

🚧 @roryabraham has triggered a test Expensify/App build. You can view the workflow run here.

github-actions · 2026-02-27T21:43:37Z

🧪🧪 Use the links below to test this adhoc build on Android, iOS, and Web. Happy testing! 🧪🧪
Built from App PR #82952.

Android 🤖	iOS 🍎
	https://ad-hoc-expensify-cash.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/rock-artifacts/ad-hoc/rock-ios-device-AdHoc-98c0038-7ab88ad-a777e765bb9678de8231b1c5157ff0699e5c959d/index.html

Web 🕸️
⏩ SKIPPED ⏩
The build for Web was skipped

👀 View the workflow run that generated this build 👀

rinej added 2 commits February 19, 2026 14:47

set-up-sentry-release-upload

4e9d873

upload adhocsbuilds to Sentry

5f497e2

melvin-bot bot assigned rinej Feb 19, 2026

rinej marked this pull request as ready for review February 19, 2026 15:41

rinej requested a review from a team as a code owner February 19, 2026 15:41

melvin-bot bot requested review from jayeshmangwani and removed request for a team February 19, 2026 15:41

This was referenced Feb 19, 2026

Set up Sentry release size analysis #82850

Open

[Metrics] Improve App Start Time Performance #77171

Open

roryabraham requested review from roryabraham and removed request for jayeshmangwani February 19, 2026 19:30

roryabraham mentioned this pull request Feb 19, 2026

[HOLD][No QA] Set up Sentry release size analysis #82937

Closed

51 tasks

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

roryabraham requested changes Feb 19, 2026

View reviewed changes

roryabraham changed the title ~~Add Sentry build size analysis for AdHoc builds~~ [No QA] Add Sentry build size analysis for AdHoc builds Feb 19, 2026

install sentry-cli newest version

b63b014

add notice log with bundle url

99058c0

rinej added 2 commits February 23, 2026 12:59

add table with sentry bundle urls

103f6f4

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-adhoc-size-analysis

9ecdfff

rinej added 4 commits February 24, 2026 12:29

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-adhoc-size-analysis

0036053

add upload sentry bundle logic to separate files

b2974cd

bump sentry-cli version

d34193f

generate aab for adhocs

043541a

rinej added 2 commits February 24, 2026 19:01

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-release-size-analysis

956908f

adjust after mergin main

272110a

This comment was marked as outdated.

Sign in to view

This comment was marked as resolved.

Sign in to view

rinej added 3 commits February 25, 2026 15:30

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-adhoc-size-analysis

0a0e3ff

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-adhoc-size-analysis

75f8d6b

add secondary rock build for aab format

c3ad3df

roryabraham requested changes Feb 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

roryabraham mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2026

Strip Hermes debug info from production iOS bytecode #83256

Merged

51 tasks

rinej added 4 commits February 27, 2026 15:54

Merge branch 'main' into set-up-sentry-adhoc-size-analysis

ce6d4ce

Merge branch 'set-up-sentry-release-size-analysis' into set-up-sentry…

19722f3

…-adhoc-size-analysis

unify sentry bundle upload for adhocs and release

c28d17e

unify the sentry bundle upload for IOS

c7cc468

roryabraham changed the title ~~[No QA] Add Sentry build size analysis for AdHoc builds~~ [No QA] ci: Add Sentry build size analysis Feb 27, 2026

roryabraham requested changes Feb 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

build aab for both adhoc and release

98c0038

Conversation

rinej commented Feb 19, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Explanation of Change

Fixed Issues

Tests

Offline tests

QA Steps

PR Author Checklist

Screenshots/Videos

Uh oh!

melvin-bot bot commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 19, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

roryabraham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

rinej commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

rinej commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 20, 2026

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 23, 2026 • edited by github-actions bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 23, 2026

Uh oh!

rinej commented Feb 24, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 24, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment was marked as outdated.

This comment was marked as resolved.

github-actions bot commented Feb 24, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 24, 2026

Uh oh!

rinej commented Feb 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

rinej commented Feb 25, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham commented Feb 26, 2026

Uh oh!

roryabraham left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

roryabraham Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

rinej Feb 27, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Feb 27, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

rinej commented Feb 19, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 23, 2026 •

edited by github-actions bot

Loading

rinej commented Feb 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading