The comment might be misleading when size limit fails

[ad1992]

Below is the result json after running size-limit

[
  {
    "name": "dist/excalidraw.production.min.js",
    "passed": false,
    "size": 286003,
    "sizeLimit": 285000,
    "running": 0.06112,
    "loading": 5.58599609375
  },
  {
    "name": "dist/excalidraw-assets/locales",
    "passed": true,
    "size": 267745,
    "sizeLimit": 270000,
    "running": 0.017186666666666666,
    "loading": 5.[229](https://github.com/excalidraw/excalidraw/actions/runs/5659242959/job/15332367714?pr=6803#step:6:230)39453125
  },
  {
    "name": "dist/excalidraw-assets/vendor*.js",
    "passed": true,
    "size": 28735,
    "sizeLimit": 30000,
    "running": 0.021683333333333336,
    "loading": 0.561[230](https://github.com/excalidraw/excalidraw/actions/runs/5659242959/job/15332367714?pr=6803#step:6:231)46875
  }
]

As you can see the size is exceeded for excalidraw.production.min.js

However in the comment posted by size-limit, this is what is shown

And its not clear as the size 279.33 kB is within the limit of excalidraw.production.min.js (285 kB)

[ai]

Seems like you need to open an issue in size-limit-action since that project has a different maintainer

[ad1992]

@ai before I make the change for this fix in the other gh action, I would like to inform that the difference is as the gh action library uses bytes (KIB) as mentioned here so should I change it in the gh action so it considers in KB or change here so it considers in KIB ?

[ai]

Yes, it is better to keep the same size format for both tool

[ad1992]

Yes, it is better to keep the same size format for both tool

yep so as I asked above, which repo would be better to make the change? This repo or Gh actions repo?

[ai]

Gh actions repo