Skip to content

Boost: Move the optimize part of LCP into a new class #43190

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: trunk
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

donnchawp
Copy link
Contributor

@donnchawp donnchawp commented Apr 22, 2025

I moved the optimize part of the LCP code into a new class to separate it from the base LCP class that sets things up. As suggested by @dilirity.

TODO: a factory method to generate an optimizer based on LCP data. Props @haqadn here.

// Create an optimizer from a factory function that returns new Background_Image_Optimizer( $lcp_data['element'] ) or new Img_Tag_Optimizer( $lcp_data['element'] )
$optimizer = $this->create_optimizer_from_data( $lcp_data );
$optimizer->optimize( $buffer );

Proposed changes:

  • Create a new class called LCP_Optimize
  • Move optimize, optimize_viewport and optimize_image_tag functions into the new class.

Other information:

  • Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
  • Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
  • Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

  • Test LCP on your local test site.

@donnchawp donnchawp requested review from dilirity and a team April 22, 2025 13:19
@donnchawp donnchawp self-assigned this Apr 22, 2025
@donnchawp donnchawp added [Pri] Normal [Plugin] Boost A feature to speed up the site and improve performance. [Boost Feature] Lcp labels Apr 22, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 22, 2025

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

  • ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  • ✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Review, ...).
  • ✅ Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
  • ✅ Add testing instructions.
  • ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  • ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖


Follow this PR Review Process:

  1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
  2. Make sure to test your changes on all platforms that it applies to. You're responsible for the quality of the code you ship.
  3. You can use GitHub's Reviewers functionality to request a review.
  4. When it's reviewed and merged, you will be pinged in Slack to deploy the changes to WordPress.com simple once the build is done.

If you have questions about anything, reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!


Boost plugin:

  • Next scheduled release: April 30, 2025

If you have any questions about the release process, please ask in the #jetpack-releases channel on Slack.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the [Status] Needs Author Reply We need more details from you. This label will be auto-added until the PR meets all requirements. label Apr 22, 2025
Copy link

Code Coverage Summary

Coverage changed in 1 file.

File Coverage Δ% Δ Uncovered
projects/plugins/boost/app/modules/optimizations/lcp/class-lcp.php 0/69 (0.00%) 0.00% -28 💚

1 file is newly checked for coverage.

File Coverage
projects/plugins/boost/app/modules/optimizations/lcp/class-lcp-optimizer.php 0/29 (0.00%) 💔

Full summary · PHP report · JS report

If appropriate, add one of these labels to override the failing coverage check: Covered by non-unit tests Use to ignore the Code coverage requirement check when E2Es or other non-unit tests cover the code Coverage tests to be added later Use to ignore the Code coverage requirement check when tests will be added in a follow-up PR I don't care about code coverage for this PR Use this label to ignore the check for insufficient code coveage.

@donnchawp donnchawp added [Type] Task and removed [Status] Needs Author Reply We need more details from you. This label will be auto-added until the PR meets all requirements. labels Apr 22, 2025
@donnchawp donnchawp removed request for a team and dilirity April 22, 2025 15:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant