PromucFlow_constructor/app/client/src/selectors/layoutSystemSelectors.ts

53 lines
1.8 KiB
TypeScript
Raw Normal View History

feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
import type { AppState } from "@appsmith/reducers";
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
import { getIsAnvilLayoutEnabled } from "layoutSystems/anvil/integrations/selectors";
fix: Anvil Bug fixes for R1 (#31066) > Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description This PR has multiple bug fixes - Widget boundary showing up in preview mode. - Widget flickering when space distribution changes. - highlights seem blurred near table widget - scrolling to widget when clicked from entity explorer. - Adding bindings for Zones and Sections on entity explorer. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced ease-in animation for flexgrow value changes in layout components. - Enhanced canvas dragging experience by updating z-index based on activation state. - **Improvements** - Optimized widget rendering by utilizing unique widget IDs. - Improved code maintainability with the introduction of a styled `canvas` component for better styling encapsulation. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-02-27 04:41:55 +00:00
import { getAnvilWidgetDOMId } from "layoutSystems/common/utils/LayoutElementPositionsObserver/utils";
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
import { LayoutSystemTypes } from "layoutSystems/types";
/**
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
* Returns the layout system type based on the state of the application.
* @param state - The current state of the application.
* @returns The layout system type.
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
*/
export const getLayoutSystemType = (state: AppState) => {
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
// Check if the application has a defined appPositioning type
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
if (
state.ui.applications?.currentApplication?.applicationDetail?.appPositioning
?.type
) {
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
// Get the layout system type based on the appPositioning type
const layoutSystemType =
LayoutSystemTypes[
state.ui.applications.currentApplication?.applicationDetail
?.appPositioning?.type
];
// If the layout system type is not ANVIL, return it
if (layoutSystemType !== LayoutSystemTypes.ANVIL) {
return layoutSystemType;
}
// Check if the ANVIL layout system is enabled
const isAnvilEnabled = getIsAnvilLayoutEnabled(state);
// If ANVIL is enabled, return ANVIL as the layout system type
if (isAnvilEnabled) {
return LayoutSystemTypes.ANVIL;
}
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
}
chore: Merge wds and anvil feature flags (#32609) [![workerB](https://img.shields.io/endpoint?url=https%3A%2F%2Fworkerb.linearb.io%2Fv2%2Fbadge%2Fprivate%2FU2FsdGVkX1LNwrMHgs05enX0VDk8QxZH7uP7Ii4HE%2Fcollaboration.svg%3FcacheSeconds%3D60)](https://workerb.linearb.io/v2/badge/collaboration-page?magicLinkId=M7zehz4) ## Description Cleaning up three patterns of checks to enable wds and anvil into two. wds and anvil had to have different flags coz anvil had to play catch up with wds, now that's not the case so it does not make sense to have two flags. Old patterns - checking if the wds feature flag is enabled - checking if the anvil feature flag is enabled - checking if the layout system of the app is anvil New Pattern - checking if anvil feature flag is enabled (used only for creating an anvil app) - checking if layout system of the app is anvil Fixes #32590 _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8663918496> > Commit: e10cc2a84ed680b29c49c5b2e8175df4c18da2f8 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8663918496&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Consolidated the usage of layout system checks across the application to use a unified Anvil layout selector, enhancing consistency in layout-related conditional logic. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed outdated feature flags related to the Anvil + WDS integration, ensuring the application's feature toggling aligns with the current development strategy. - **Tests** - Updated unit tests to align with the new method of layout system determination, ensuring test environments accurately reflect production behavior. - **Chores** - Cleaned up redundant code and feature flags that are no longer in use, simplifying the codebase and reducing potential for errors. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-04-12 17:24:04 +00:00
// If no layout system type is found, return FIXED as the default layout system type
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) ## Description This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types. In this PR, BE changes: - Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum. FE changes: - rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places except the reducer and application payload. - move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #26973 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
2023-10-04 08:54:16 +00:00
return LayoutSystemTypes.FIXED;
};
fix: Anvil Bug fixes for R1 (#31066) > Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description This PR has multiple bug fixes - Widget boundary showing up in preview mode. - Widget flickering when space distribution changes. - highlights seem blurred near table widget - scrolling to widget when clicked from entity explorer. - Adding bindings for Zones and Sections on entity explorer. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced ease-in animation for flexgrow value changes in layout components. - Enhanced canvas dragging experience by updating z-index based on activation state. - **Improvements** - Optimized widget rendering by utilizing unique widget IDs. - Improved code maintainability with the introduction of a styled `canvas` component for better styling encapsulation. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2024-02-27 04:41:55 +00:00
export const getWidgetSelectorByWidgetId = (
state: AppState,
widgetId: string,
) => {
const layoutSystemType = getLayoutSystemType(state);
switch (layoutSystemType) {
case LayoutSystemTypes.ANVIL:
return getAnvilWidgetDOMId(widgetId);
default:
return widgetId;
}
};
feat: implement dropping building blocks on canvas (#31857) ## Description > [!TIP] **Goal** To drag any building blocks from the explorer and drop at any position on the users canvas with full implementation. **Implementation** - Show skeleton widget when building block is initially dragged unto the canvas. - Make API call to add datasources, queries, and JS to existing page of users app - Get returned widget DSL and use existing copy paste logic to display widgets on the canvas - Remove loading state, handle clean up for copy paste - Run all queries newly created by the dropped building block **Limitations** - There is a loading state and the process is not instant like dropping a widget This PR is followed by this one [here](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/31406), which displays the loading state when a building block is dragged unto the canvas. Fixes #31856 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Templates, @tag.MainContainer, @tag.Visual, @tag.Widget" ### :mag: Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8701664455> > Commit: 456a7a0a322e76974a7f5c41a6c1e274ef82e4ea > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8701664455&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new "Building Blocks" category in the widget sidebar for enhanced organization and accessibility. - Added functionality to resize building blocks with new horizontal and vertical limits. - Implemented a "see more" button for "Building Blocks" to display all associated widgets. - Enhanced drag and drop functionality for building blocks on the canvas. - **Enhancements** - Improved sorting logic for widgets, prioritizing "Building Blocks". - Enhanced widget search functionality within the sidebar. - **Bug Fixes** - Adjusted default rows and columns settings for explorer building blocks to improve layout and usability. - **Documentation** - Updated messages and constants related to new features for clarity and consistency. - **Refactor** - Refactored drag and drop handling logic to support new building block constraints and features. - Updated application state management to include building blocks related data. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Anagh Hegde <anagh@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com>
2024-04-16 08:41:09 +00:00
export const isFixedLayoutSelector = (state: AppState) =>
getLayoutSystemType(state) === LayoutSystemTypes.FIXED;