Use relative path for bundle labels in bundle analysis

[ittaibaratz]

There is no value in providing the full path as the bundle label, and it can get quite long in CI/CD

Changing to relativePath will make the label shorter and easier to read

↪️ Pull Request

💻 Examples

🚨 Test instructions

✔️ PR Todo

• Added/updated unit tests for this change
• Filled out test instructions (In case there aren't any unit tests)
• Included links to related issues/PRs

[height]

Link Height tasks by mentioning a task ID in the pull request title or commit messages, or description and comments with the keyword link (e.g. "Link T-123").

💡Tip: You can also use "Close T-X" to automatically close a task when the pull request is merged.

[ittaibaratz]

@mischnic I would also like to enable bundle analysis on the modules only: (Right now it has both module and no-module, so everything is replicated)

Any quick pointers for how I would make it happen? Thanks!

i.e. where can I place the config for that behavior assuming that not everyone wants it.

cc @devongovett

[mischnic]

I guess the hard part for that is determining which bundle is the nomodule half of a nomodule/module pair.
And a config that only lists module bundles in the report could incorrectly filter out non-module worker bundles...

[mischnic]

The only problem I can see with this change is projects including files from outside the project path, then you'd get paths like ../../foo. But this situation isn't really supported anyway because these files aren not watched anyway