🚅 Deployed to the rivet-pr-3776 environment in rivet-frontend

• refactor(icons): extract duplicate utilities, fix naming consistency, improve docs #3784
• refactor(frontend): make building icons process as one-time requirement #3776 👈 (View in Graphite)
• main

How to use the Graphite Merge Queue

Add the label merge-queue to this PR to add it to the merge queue.

You must have a Graphite account in order to use the merge queue. Sign up using this link.

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Graphite Automations

PR Review: Refactor Frontend Icons Build Process

Summary

This PR refactors the @rivet-gg/icons package to move icon generation from a postinstall hook to a pre-commit vendoring process. Icons (including Font Awesome Pro) are now pre-generated and committed to the repository, eliminating the need for consumers to have a Font Awesome token.

Strengths

1. Improved Developer Experience: Consumers no longer need FONTAWESOME_PACKAGE_TOKEN, making the package easier to use
2. Better Build Reliability: Eliminates runtime dependencies on Font Awesome registry during installation
3. Clear Separation of Concerns: generate-manifest.js scans FA packages and creates manifest; vendor-icons.js generates icon files from manifest
4. Comprehensive Documentation: README clearly explains the legal restrictions and contribution workflow
5. Proper Licensing: Added LICENSE file and legal notices throughout

Code Quality Observations

Good Practices

• Well-structured scripts with clear phases (setup, generation, bundling)
• Good error handling with descriptive messages
• Helpful logging with emojis for UX
• Duplicate detection to avoid icon conflicts

Areas for Improvement

1. Security Concern - Token Exposure

The generated .npmrc file is properly gitignored, but consider adding verification that it is not being tracked before proceeding with script execution.

2. Missing Error Context (vendor-icons.js:177-190)

When an icon does not exist, it silently falls back to faSquare. This could hide missing icons. Consider logging a warning when fallback occurs so maintainers know which icons failed to resolve.

3. Hardcoded Package Versions

Package versions are duplicated in both scripts. Consider extracting to a shared config file to maintain DRY principle and prevent version mismatches.

4. Bundle Size Impact

The PR adds 79,261 lines to dist/index.js (~104MB total additions). While necessary for pre-vendoring, consider:

• Documenting the expected bundle size in the README
• Using Git LFS for large generated files if repository size becomes problematic
• Verifying tree-shaking works correctly for consumers

5. Type Safety

The @ts-nocheck disables all TypeScript checking. Consider converting to TypeScript for better maintainability or adding complete JSDoc types.

6. Missing Cleanup

Both scripts create temporary files in src/ but do not clean them up. Consider cleanup after success or document why they are kept for caching.

Testing Recommendations

1. Verify icon resolution: Test that commonly used icons resolve correctly and do not fall back to faSquare
2. Test without FA token: Confirm consumers can pnpm install without FONTAWESOME_PACKAGE_TOKEN
3. Bundle size analysis: Verify tree-shaking works and only used icons are bundled
4. Edge cases: Test behavior with corrupted manifest, unavailable FA packages, special character icon names

Minor Issues

1. README line 34 references scripts/generateManifest.js but should be scripts/generate-manifest.js
2. Verify package.json types field pointing to ./src/index.gen.ts works properly for consumers

Performance Considerations

The esbuild configuration looks solid with tree-shaking enabled, neutral platform, ESM format, and external peer dependencies properly configured.

Security Assessment

Low Risk - The scripts only run with explicit maintainer action, require authentication token (not exposed in code), generate static files, and .npmrc is properly gitignored. Consider adding verification that .npmrc is not tracked before running.

Overall Assessment

Recommendation: Approve with minor suggestions

This is a well-executed refactor that significantly improves the developer experience. The code quality is good, with clear structure and helpful documentation. The main concerns are around error visibility (silent fallbacks) and repository size impact, but these are manageable.

The legal licensing is properly handled, and the separation of manifest generation from vendoring is a good architectural choice.

Priority Actions:

1. Add warning logs when icons fall back to faSquare
2. Document expected bundle/repository size impact
3. Test tree-shaking works correctly for consumers
4. Consider cleanup of temporary files or document why they are kept

Great work on this refactor!

hey @copilot can you:

• fix the 1. Duplicate Code (DRY violation)
• fix the 1. Inconsistent File Naming (scripts/generate-manifest.js:34)
• fix the 4. README Improvements
• fix the Line 5: "license": "UNLICENSED" contradicts the LICENSE file., provide correct value here
• fix the 1. Duplicate Code (DRY violation)

@jog1t I've opened a new pull request, #3784, to work on those changes. Once the pull request is ready, I'll request review from you.

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/cloudflare-workers@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/db@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/framework-base@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/next-js@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/react@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/rivetkit@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/sql-loader@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/virtual-websocket@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner@3776

pnpm add https://pkg.pr.new/rivet-dev/rivet/@rivetkit/engine-runner-protocol@3776

commit: 00601f7

PR Review: refactor(frontend): make building icons process as one-time requirement

Overview

This PR refactors the @rivet-gg/icons package to pre-generate and commit all Font Awesome icons (including Pro icons) to the repository. This eliminates the need for consumers to have a Font Awesome Pro token.

✅ Strengths

Architecture & Design

• Excellent separation of concerns between maintainer workflows and consumer usage
• Well-structured scripts that are modular and follow single-responsibility principle
• Smart deduplication handling icon aliases with registeredIcons Set
• Proper fallback handling to faSquare for missing icons

Code Quality

• Clear documentation with legal notices, troubleshooting, and maintainer instructions
• Good error handling with environment variable checks
• Proper LICENSE file protecting Font Awesome Pro licensing

User Experience

• Zero-config for consumers - no more postinstall scripts or token requirements
• Faster installs - no icon processing during pnpm install
• Reliable - eliminates build-time failures from missing tokens

🔍 Issues & Concerns

1. Large Binary Files in Git (CRITICAL)

The PR commits a 3.5MB dist/index.js file to git:

• dist/index.js: 3.5MB (79,261 lines)
• manifest.json: 424KB
• src/index.gen.js: ~200KB
• src/index.gen.ts: ~200KB

Problems: Bloats repository size permanently, every clone downloads this data, diffs are meaningless for generated code.

Recommendations:

1. Consider Git LFS for dist/index.js
2. Alternative: Build dist/index.js on npm publish via prepublish script
3. Update .gitattributes to mark generated files

2. Missing Input Validation

Location: shared-utils.js:83-87

The faCamelCase function lacks validation that str is defined. Could crash on edge cases.

3. Error Handling Inconsistency

Location: vendor-icons.js:240-243

Stack traces are lost in bundleWithEsbuild error handler. The pattern at vendor-icons.js:285-292 is correct - just inconsistent.

4. Security: Environment Variable Spreading (LOW)

Location: shared-utils.js:143-147

The env: { ...process.env } spreads all environment variables into npm subprocess. Be explicit about which vars to pass (PATH, HOME, FONTAWESOME_PACKAGE_TOKEN).

5. Missing Cleanup

Scripts create src/node_modules, src/.npmrc, src/package.json but never clean them up. Document cleanup process for maintainers.

6. TypeScript Type Definitions

Location: package.json:32

TypeScript expects .d.ts files, not .ts source files. This is unconventional and could cause issues.

7. Performance: O(n²) Loops

Location: generate-manifest.js:83-107

Two-pass algorithm is fine for ~5000 icons but could be optimized with Map for O(1) lookups if icon count grows.

🎯 Testing Recommendations

Missing test coverage:

1. Unit tests for utility functions (faCamelCase, etc.)
2. Integration tests for manifest → vendor → bundle pipeline
3. Edge case testing: missing icons, duplicates, invalid manifest

📊 Performance Considerations

Positive:

• Faster consumer installs
• Smaller consumer node_modules
• Tree-shaking friendly ESM exports

Concerns:

• 3.5MB bundle size concerning for browser bundles
• Verify tree-shaking works correctly in consumer apps

🔒 Security Review

Good practices:

• No dynamic code execution
• Safe use of spawnSync with array arguments
• Environment variable validation
• No credential exposure

Minor concerns: See issue #4 above.

📝 Documentation Suggestions

Add to CLAUDE.md:

• Document that generated files are committed to git
• Maintainer-only: Run pnpm manifest then pnpm vendor to update icons
• Never run icon generation in CI or consumer environments
• Note 3.5MB dist/index.js size

✅ Checklist

• Code follows repository conventions
• Proper error handling
• Legal/licensing considerations addressed
• Documentation updated
• No security vulnerabilities
• ⚠️ Large binary files consideration
• Tests added (missing)
• TypeScript types correct

🎬 Recommendation

Approve with minor changes requested.

The refactor is well-designed and significantly improves developer experience. Main concern is the large generated file in git.

Priority actions:

1. Before merging: Decide on strategy for dist/index.js (Git LFS, prepublish build, or document why it is acceptable)
2. Low priority: Address input validation and error handling consistency
3. Future work: Add test coverage and review TypeScript type definitions

The code quality is high and architectural improvements are significant. Great work! 🎉

Review completed by Claude Code 🤖

Code Review: Refactor Icon Package Build Process

Summary

This PR successfully refactors the @rivet-gg/icons package from a runtime postinstall approach to a pre-built vendored approach. The icons (including Font Awesome Pro) are now generated once by maintainers and committed to the repository, eliminating the need for end users to have Font Awesome tokens.

✅ Strengths

1. Improved User Experience: End users no longer need FONTAWESOME_PACKAGE_TOKEN, making the package much easier to consume
2. Better Documentation: The README and new LICENSE file clearly explain the legal restrictions and usage
3. Clean Architecture: Scripts are well-organized with shared utilities in shared-utils.js
4. Proper Legal Notice: LICENSE file and code banners appropriately warn about Font Awesome Pro restrictions

🔍 Code Quality Observations

Good Practices

• Scripts use proper error handling with exitWithError()
• Logging with emoji prefixes makes output clear and easy to scan
• Deduplication logic in generate-manifest.js prevents duplicate icon registration
• Canonical icon selection ensures consistent icon naming

Areas for Consideration

1. Large Generated Files (High Priority)

• dist/index.js: 3.5MB and 79,261 lines
• src/index.gen.js: 4,832 lines
• src/index.gen.ts: 4,833 lines

These files are committed to git, which will:

• Significantly increase repository size over time
• Make git operations slower
• Create large diffs on every icon update
• Impact CI/CD performance

Recommendation: Consider using Git LFS for dist/index.js or document the trade-offs.

2. Missing Validation in vendor-icons.js

The existence check does not validate if the icon is actually accessible. If a Font Awesome package updates and removes an icon, this will fail silently at build time but cause runtime errors.

Recommendation: Add error logging when falling back to faSquare

3. Hardcoded Package Versions

In shared-utils.js, Font Awesome package versions are hardcoded. Updates require manual changes in two places.

Recommendation: Consider reading versions from the workspace root or add a comment explaining the manual sync requirement.

4. Missing .gitattributes

Large generated files should have special git treatment to improve diff performance.

Recommendation: Add .gitattributes to mark generated files as linguist-generated

🔒 Security Considerations

1. Font Awesome Token Handling: ✅ Token is properly isolated to maintainer scripts only
2. License Compliance: ✅ Clear legal notices prevent unauthorized use
3. Dependency Security: Scripts spawn npm install with inherited env - acceptable for maintainer tooling

🧪 Testing Concerns

Missing Test Coverage:

• No validation that generated icons actually render
• No type checking that TypeScript definitions are correct
• No verification that all icons in manifest are actually generated

Recommendation: Add a simple smoke test in package.json scripts

📊 Performance Considerations

Build Performance: ~1-2 minutes per icon update - acceptable for maintainer workflow

Runtime Performance: ✅ End users get pre-built bundle - no performance impact

🐛 Potential Bugs

Icon Name Collision (Low Risk): If multiple icons have the same iconBaseName but different casing, the canonical selection might be ambiguous. Impact is low, but worth logging a warning.

📝 Documentation Quality

Excellent: LICENSE file is clear and legally sound, README explains the change well

Could Improve: Add a "For Maintainers" section in README explaining how to run vendor scripts

🎯 Recommendations Priority

High Priority:

1. Add .gitattributes to mark generated files
2. Add validation logging when icons fall back to faSquare
3. Consider Git LFS for dist/index.js or document why committed

Medium Priority:
4. Add build verification smoke test
5. Add warning when multiple icons share same base name
6. Document maintainer workflow in README

✅ Approval Status

This PR is ready to merge with the understanding that the large generated files are intentional. The refactoring successfully achieves its goal of simplifying icon package consumption while maintaining proper Font Awesome Pro license compliance.

Suggested follow-up: File issues for the medium-priority recommendations to address in future PRs.

Great work on this refactor! The architecture is solid and the legal compliance is handled properly. The main consideration is managing the large generated files in git long-term. 🎉

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

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
rivet-cloud	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 9, 2026 9:49pm
rivet-inspector	Ready	Preview, Comment	Jan 9, 2026 9:49pm
rivetkit-serverless	Error		Jan 9, 2026 9:49pm

1 Skipped Deployment

Project	Deployment	Review	Updated (UTC)
rivet-site	Ignored	Preview	Jan 9, 2026 9:49pm

Merge activity

• Jan 9, 9:47 PM UTC: jog1t added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Jan 9, 9:48 PM UTC: CI is running for this pull request on a draft pull request (#3806) due to your merge queue CI optimization settings.
• Jan 9, 9:48 PM UTC: Merged by the Graphite merge queue via draft PR: #3806.