refactor: remove always-on code fences#40318
Merged
davidmurdoch merged 13 commits intomainfrom Feb 25, 2026
Merged
Conversation
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
|
CLA Signature Action: All authors have signed the CLA. You may need to manually re-run the blocking PR check if it doesn't pass in a few minutes. |
Contributor
✨ Files requiring CODEOWNER review ✨🔑 @MetaMask/accounts-engineers (1 files, +22 -38)
✅ @MetaMask/confirmations (1 files, +0 -4)
👨🔧 @MetaMask/core-extension-ux (5 files, +115 -243)
🫰 @MetaMask/core-platform (6 files, +0 -16)
|
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
Builds ready [cb38216]
⚡ Performance Benchmarks (1331 ± 92 ms)
🌐 Dapp Page Load BenchmarksCurrent Commit: 📄 Localhost MetaMask Test DappSamples: 100 Summary
📈 Detailed Results
Bundle size diffs
|
…k, but that might be a mistake)
HowardBraham
force-pushed
the
refactor-always-on-fences
branch
from
cb38216 to
5d4bac7
Compare
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
![cursor[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1210556?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
| let enabled = false; | ||
| ///: BEGIN:ONLY_INCLUDE_IF(bitcoin) | ||
| enabled = isMultichainFeatureEnabled(bitcoinAccounts); | ||
| ///: END:ONLY_INCLUDE_IF |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Dead code pattern left from fence removal
Low Severity
After removing the bitcoin and tron code fences, getIsBitcoinSupportEnabled and getIsTronSupportEnabled retain a let enabled = false; enabled = ... pattern with a now-stale comment "When bitcoin is not enabled, always return false." The initial false assignment is dead code since the next line always overwrites it. Compare with getIsSolanaSupportEnabled which cleanly returns the result directly. These selectors can be simplified to match that pattern.
Additional Locations (1)
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a much larger issue to be resolved later, I put it in a TODO
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
Builds ready [5d4bac7]
⚡ Performance Benchmarks (1405 ± 106 ms)
🌐 Dapp Page Load BenchmarksCurrent Commit: 📄 Localhost MetaMask Test DappSamples: 100 Summary
📈 Detailed Results
Bundle size diffs
|
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
Builds ready [5359478]
⚡ Performance Benchmarks (1433 ± 107 ms)
🌐 Dapp Page Load BenchmarksCurrent Commit: 📄 Localhost MetaMask Test DappSamples: 100 Summary
📈 Detailed Results
Bundle size diffs [🚀 Bundle size reduced!]
|
n3ps
previously approved these changes
Feb 24, 2026
n3ps
reviewed
Feb 24, 2026
|
|
||
| ///: END:ONLY_INCLUDE_IF | ||
|
|
||
| UnifiedTransactionList.propTypes = { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This file will be retired soon-ish but no harm cleaning it up now
Other changes for extension UX LGTM
Contributor
|
Looks like these instances are missing from the diff: |
Contributor
Author
@MajorLift Oy, these aren't a hard merge conflict but basically a soft merge conflict. Someone added these new ones. How do we deal with this? |
Contributor
|
We should aim to have the codebase free of all targeted code fences at the time this merges, no? If so, incoming regressions from the main branch will need to be resolved here. This unfortunately makes gathering CO approvals really tedious since they can be dismissed at any time. That said I'm not opposed to cleaning these up in a follow-up PR. I think the only thing to keep in mind would be that if |
Contributor
Author
|
@MajorLift even once this merges, it doesn't contain a mechanism to stop people from putting new code fences in. I also don't know the alternative to this block in builds.yml |
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
davidmurdoch
previously approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
HowardBraham
force-pushed
the
refactor-always-on-fences
branch
from
6895948 to
f20c3e6
Compare
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
HowardBraham
force-pushed
the
refactor-always-on-fences
branch
from
f20c3e6 to
371c87f
Compare
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
davidmurdoch
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
|
HowardBraham
temporarily deployed
to
pr-comment
GitHub Actions
Inactive
Contributor
Builds ready [371c87f]
⚡ Performance Benchmarks (1409 ± 114 ms)
🌐 Dapp Page Load BenchmarksCurrent Commit: 📄 Localhost MetaMask Test DappSamples: 100 Summary
📈 Detailed Results
Bundle size diffs
|
n3ps
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
metamaskbot
added
the
release-13.21.0
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 subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
6 participants
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.
Description
Q: Why is this a single PR and not 6 PRs?
A: It might be easier to review, but they all touch overlapping files in overlapping areas, and if this were 6 PRs you would get a whole bunch of merge conflicts. I did separate it into 6 commits though, if you want to review it per commit.
Removed the following 6 code fence classes:
Changelog
CHANGELOG entry: null
Note
Medium Risk
Broad, cross-cutting removal of build-time guards can change what code ships/executes per build flavor and may surface previously-uncompiled paths or missing dependencies, especially around multichain/Snap-keyring flows.
Overview
Removes the
ONLY_INCLUDE_IFcode-fence gating for features that were effectively always enabled (keyring-snaps,multichain,bitcoin,tron, plusbitcoin-swapsand apetnamestest-only fence), making the previously conditional code paths compile and run consistently across standard builds.This simplifies build configuration (
builds.ymldropsmultichain/bitcoin-swapsfeature entries and converts bitcoin/tron/keyring-snaps into plain asset sections) and updates both background + UI code to treat Snap-keyring account management, multichain account providers, and non-EVM transaction/activity UI as always present (while still respecting runtime remote feature flags for enabling/disabling providers).Written by Cursor Bugbot for commit 371c87f. This will update automatically on new commits. Configure here.