chore: rebuild Admin UI bundle for the 2026-08-08 release - #36297
Merged
yuneng-berri merged 1 commit intoAug 8, 2026
Conversation
Contributor
|
Too many files changed for review (710 files, 100 file limit). |
yucheng-berri
approved these changes
Aug 8, 2026
yuneng-berri
enabled auto-merge
August 8, 2026 20:18
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
Contributor
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
TLDR
Problem this solves:
How it solves it:
litellm/proxy/_experimental/out/from staging HEADVCvPhLLOUp92Yx-E-CVlVtoHynDchE8aLeEewsZVNDO8User Flow
Before: a proxy admin opening the Admin UI gets the bundle exported on 2026-08-01, so a week of dashboard work is invisible to them even though it is merged
_next/static/VCvPhLLOUp92Yx-E-CVlV/After: the same admin gets the dashboard as it exists on staging today, and the served UI matches the dev server
_next/static/HynDchE8aLeEewsZVNDO8/Relevant issues
Linear ticket
Pre-Submission checklist
Please complete all items before asking a LiteLLM maintainer to review your PR
@greptileaito re-request a review after pushing changes)On the first box: every file here is Next.js export output, so there is no hand-written code to test. The check that matters is that a running proxy serves this exact bundle, which is what the proof below exercises
Delays in PR merge?
If you're seeing a delay in your PR being merged, ping the LiteLLM Team on Slack (#pr-review).
Screenshots / Proof of Fix
The thing worth proving is that the proxy serves this committed bundle rather than a local rebuild, so run these against a checkout of this branch with no dev server involved
python litellm/proxy/proxy_cli.py --config litellm/proxy/dev_config.yaml --detailed_debug --reload --use_v2_migration_resolver 2>&1 | tee litellm.logcurl -s http://localhost:4000/ui/ | grep -o '_next/static/[A-Za-z0-9_-]*/_buildManifest.js', which should printHynDchE8aLeEewsZVNDO8and notVCvPhLLOUp92Yx-E-CVlVgit status --shortafterwards and confirm it prints nothing, showing the proxy did not overwrite the committed artifactsType
🚄 Infrastructure
Changes
Regenerated
litellm/proxy/_experimental/out/by runningui/litellm-dashboard/build_release_ui.shon this branch. 710 files, all of them Next.js export output: content-hashed chunks, the per-route HTML, and the build-id directory rename. No source file is touchedProvenance, so a reviewer can reproduce it:
litellm_internal_stagingat97a59c8c9084d63cbdcff2b3cbf7b2434c43f7405d3b123358Worth flagging: the previous bundle was built on node v20.20.2, and this is the first one built on node 24. The dashboard's
.nvmrcpins 24.19.0 and itsenginesnow require node >=24.14.1 withengine-strict=true, so node 20 can no longer install the dependencies at all. That toolchain move, not just a week of source drift, is part of why the diff is broadThe one build warning is pre-existing and unrelated: Turbopack does not encode AVIF, so
public/assets/logos/enkrypt_ai.avifis emitted unoptimizedFinal Attestation
Left unchecked deliberately: this PR adds no tests, because it adds no hand-written code. The regression surface is the dashboard itself, and the click-through in the proof section is how it gets covered