Yo @Deltakosh and @sebavan
Is there something missing in babylon.max.js in 8.14.0… its the same size as the min version 7.1MB
Hi @MackeyK24, originally we were building both dev and prod builds of each package with each PR and outputting the minified and unminified bundles. We were starting to see memory pressure during our builds so @RaananW (our build wizard) suggested we only build prod /output the minified js (since users can still debug the source code using the minified js + source maps). However for backwards compatibility we needed to keep outputting a file named .max.js (in case any projects were referencing it directly) so we are simply copying the minified file over to a .max.js and figured if we saw any major concerns from the community we could revert.
Is this breaking a scenario for you or were you more confused by the size change?
So it’s extra steps to see the source plain?
No problem for me, i just notice my build package for my toolkit was smaller since 8.14.0
Then when i finally tracked back what was missing… i noticed babylon.max.js was significantly smaller, matter of fact the same exact size of the babylon.min.js… But if that was intended and we no longer have a HUGE babylon.max.js (Which I have never used before),
I am kool wit dat 
2 Likes
@withADoveInOneHand you just need to ensure source maps are enabled in the browser dev tools (likely already be enabled) and then you can debug
Note that is the standard method of debugging even when we outputted the max.js - it is rare to debug directly within the max.js file (but I am curious if anyone does! if you do please share)
1 Like
ah you have to carry the .map file
Just cautious about proprietary seeming tooling.
1 Like
I hear you! If it weren’t for back-compat we would remove the max.js output altogether and not do the copying, then the tooling would be standard (sourcemap+minified). This is just a bandaid so we don’t break anyone’s scenario if they happen to be referencing babylon.max.js from CDN and it no longer existed
If anyone reports issues with the current solution we can certainly reassess!
1 Like