Commit Graph

18127 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Trisha Anand
481a3d52a7
Merge pull request #29754 from appsmithorg/release
chore: 20/12 daily promotion PR
2023-12-20 14:42:40 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
8e88676243
fix: Widget Context Switching (#29735)
## Description
Fixes context switching issues related to Widget List ensuring it also
works for current prod


#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29695


#### 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
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

## 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**
  - Added a search functionality to the app.
- Integrated a search bar at the top of the `Hero` component and a
`Search` component to the `App` component.
  - Included styles for the search bar in the application.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-20 12:26:16 +05:30
albinAppsmith
a185256f6a
fix: Added height to new query button menu (#29729)
## Description

This PR adds a fixed height to the new query button in datasource config
page.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/29609


#### Type of change

- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)


## 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
- [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
- [ ] 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


<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Refactor**
- Updated the action button to have a conditional height based on the
number of pages for improved layout consistency.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-20 12:19:28 +05:30
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
078ef8a538
chore: Cleanup of some deprecated objects (#29577) 2023-12-20 11:34:46 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
93f284a50b
fix: make js updates only for application js objects (#29745)
## Description
update should happen only for js objects which are created on a page not
for js modules and it's js objects. Adding sanity check which uses
selector to fetch only js objects created on page



#### 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
2023-12-20 11:22:50 +05:30
Trisha Anand
05d4b187fd
Merge pull request #29749 from appsmithorg/chore/analytics-events-intercom-consent-cherry-pick
chore: Analytics events for intercom consent cherry pick
2023-12-20 10:52:43 +05:30
Ankit Srivastava
3aedf0149f chore: added intercom consent analytics event (#29722) 2023-12-20 10:38:32 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
b39a0cba6f
fix: on click bug fix (#29743)
## Description
filtering query modules from all modules to show it on action selector


#### 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

- **Refactor**
- Improved the handling of module instances in the user interface to
enhance performance and stability.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed an issue where certain data types were incorrectly handled,
ensuring consistency and reliability in the app's data management.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-19 19:50:31 +05:30
Saroj
e2ec25bc7c
ci: Skip TBD for every push on release branch (#29732)
## Description
- Skipping TBD for every push on release branch
- TBD will run once a day on the scheduled cron
- People can still run TBD on-demand

#### Type of change
- Workflow Change

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Chores**
- Updated the CI/CD workflow to trigger Docker image builds on pushes to
the "master" branch instead of the "release" branch.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-19 18:49:39 +05:30
Pawan Kumar
1f38d7333a
chore: add action group component (#29645)
Fixes #29425 

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **New Features**
  - Introduced an icon alongside menu items, with positioning options.
- Implemented a new `ActionGroup` component to manage a group of actions
with overflow behavior and keyboard navigation.
- Added new `ActionGroupItem` and `MoreIcon` components for action
groups.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved resize handling in the `ThemeProvider` for conditional
rendering based on measurements.
- Updated button styles to adjust minimum inline sizing for better
layout.

- **Documentation**
- Created Storybook stories to showcase `ActionGroup` configurations and
usage.

- **Style**
- Modified list item styling in the `Menu` component to incorporate
icons.

- **Tests**
  - Added mock for `useDebounce` hook in `AppsmithIDE` tests.
- Updated Cypress test assertions to accommodate changes in layout
behavior.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Valera Melnikov <valera@appsmith.com>
2023-12-19 16:04:27 +03:00
Ankit Srivastava
92d5554118
chore: added intercom consent analytics event (#29722) 2023-12-19 18:08:33 +05:30
Rohan Arthur
dcad2189ff
chore: changes the copy of the profiling questions (#29707) 2023-12-19 17:51:05 +05:30
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
19cc5040f3 test: More test for frame ancestors config 2023-12-19 17:09:58 +05:30
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
ea4079da4b test: Route tests for frame ancestors config 2023-12-19 17:01:28 +05:30
Nidhi
ca2271eaf2
Merge pull request #29734 from appsmithorg/release 2023-12-19 16:43:12 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
ad8c0d8f82
fix: added analytics function to execute js function on js editor (#29733)
## Description
separated analytics function to get correct data for action execution.
This was creating problem inside package editor as application data was
not present.

#### 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**
- Integrated analytics tracking for action execution to enhance insights
into user interactions with plugins.

- **Refactor**
- Streamlined event logging in action execution by consolidating
analytics data into a single object.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-19 16:28:02 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
8d5b389f38
ci: added event_name schedule in client-build, rts-build, ci-test-custom-script to run them in scheduled run as well (#29724)
## Description
> added event_name schedule in client-build and rts-build to run them in
scheduled run as well

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
>
## Testing
> running TBP workflow to ensure nothing is impacted. 

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] TBP Run


## 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

- **Chores**
  - Updated build workflows to trigger on scheduled events.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-19 16:10:06 +05:30
ashit-rath
1fbfb28abf
chore: reset entities reducers on editor unmount (#29565)
## Description

Reset widgets, actions and jsCollection on application unmount.
This is to make sure no entities get into workflows or modules editor

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
PR for https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3138

#### 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.
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## 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**
- Implemented a feature to reset the editor to its initial state across
various components.

- **Refactor**
  - Enhanced state management to ensure a consistent reset behavior.

- **Chores**
- Updated internal state handling to improve performance and
reliability.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-19 16:01:44 +05:30
Nilansh Bansal
10005794dd
feat: http2 support for REST API and GraphQL (#29304)
## Description
> This PR adds a selection dropdown for the HTTP Version in the REST API
and GraphQL plugins.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28226 


#### 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
- [x] 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
- [ ] 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 support for selecting different HTTP protocol versions when
configuring APIs.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved user interface for API configuration with a new dropdown to
select HTTP protocol versions.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed an issue to ensure that the API configuration now correctly
displays protocol labels in dropdown menus.

- **Documentation**
- Added user-friendly placeholders and titles for secure and fast API
connection settings.

- **Refactor**
- Enhanced internal methods to support the selection of HTTP protocol
versions for API actions.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com>
2023-12-19 15:56:20 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
862cdded5a
chore: add shadow elevation color tokens (#29708)
Fixes: #29702
2023-12-19 10:43:06 +03:00
Nayan
cdfef0c546
chore: Removed unnecessary error log during auto commit (#29711) 2023-12-19 11:01:36 +05:30
Trisha Anand
abcd7855b9
Merge pull request #29719 from appsmithorg/release
19/12 Daily promotion
2023-12-19 10:49:22 +05:30
Ankita Kinger
cc61ca4c47
chore: Refactoring queries/JS section on entity explorer to support private entities on packages (#29703)
## Description

Refactoring queries/JS section on entity explorer to support private
entities on packages

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [#28495](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/28495)

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [x] Cypress

## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [x] 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
- [ ] 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

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **New Features**
  - Introduced new search filtering capabilities in the global search.
- Enhanced the `EntityExplorer` component to selectively display files
based on new criteria.

- **Enhancements**
- Expanded `JSCollection` interface to support workflow associations and
contextual actions.

- **Refactor**
- Streamlined naming functions with the introduction of
`CreateNewActionKey` enum to ensure consistency in action creation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 22:37:32 +05:30
Jacques Ikot
9a38452fe5
fix: move canvas starter datasource prompt from entity explorer to sidebar button (#29559)
## Description
In this fix, we've moved the canvas starter datasource prompt into the
newly introduced left side bar for data. This enhancement not only
ensures a more intuitive user experience but also establishes a clear
and cohesive relationship with the data button, streamlining the
workflow for a more efficient and user-friendly interface.

Notion -
https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Bring-in-data-modal-pops-up-in-the-wrong-place-after-the-new-sidebar-update-ecfe985e89944caeb618ea1a19398342?pvs=4

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29484 

#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- 
## 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
- [ ] 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

- **Style**
- Improved the visual layout of popover components for better user
interface alignment.

- **Refactor**
- Streamlined the user interface by removing the
`DatasourceStarterLayoutPrompt` from the `EntityExplorer` component.
- Enhanced the `SidebarButton` component to conditionally render the
`DatasourceStarterLayoutPrompt` based on context, ensuring a more
dynamic and responsive user experience.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 21:23:49 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
97d5e60842
test: Cypress - tags added - @tag.Workspace, @tag.Datasource, @tag.JS, @tag.PropertyPane (#29704)
## Description
> Added tags to cases 
    -   cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Workspace - @tag.Workspace
    -  cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/ApiTests - @tag.Datasource
    -  cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/Datasources - @tag.Datasource
    -  cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD - @tag.Datasource
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/JsFunctionExecution - @tag.JS
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/OnLoadTests - @tag.PropertyPane
    - cypress/e2e/Sanity/Datasources - @tag.Datasource
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane -  @tag.Datasource

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Workspace,  @tag.PropertyPane,  @tag.JS"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with
metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering.
- Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better
clarity and organization.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:41:37 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
58a8d4334e
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Radio, @tag.Rating, @tag.TextEditor, @tag.PhoneInput, @tag.IconButton, @tag.Maps, @tag.MenuButton, @tag.Progress, @tag.Statbox (#29693)
## Description
> Added tags to cases 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Modal - @tag.Modal,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Multiselect -
@tag.Multiselect, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/PhoneInput -
@tag.PhoneInput, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/RTE - @tag.TextEditor,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Radio - @tag.Radio,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Select - @tag.Select,
@tag.Widget
-
cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/StatBox_DragAndDrop_spec.js
- @tag.Statbox, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Rating - @tag.Rating,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/Progress_spec.js -
@tag.Progress, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Others/MapChart_Spec.ts -
@tag.Maps, @tag.Widget

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Radio, @tag.TextEditor, @tag.PhoneInput,
@tag.Maps"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with
metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering.
- Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better
clarity and organization.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:25:28 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
31a091efdb
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Filepicker, @tag.Form, @tag.Iframe, @tag.Image, @tag.Input (#29689)
## Description
> Added tags to 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Filepicker - @tag.Filepicker
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Form - @tag.Form
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Iframe - @tag.Iframe
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Image - @tag.Image
    - cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Input - @tag.Input


#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget" 
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Filepicker ,@tag.Image" 

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress

## 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

- **Refactor**
- Enhanced test suites with tags for better categorization and
searchability.
	- Improved test descriptions and reordered test steps for clarity.
	- Updated test suites to use arrow functions for consistency.

- **Tests**
- Expanded test coverage for file picker widgets, including additional
file formats.
	- Added new test cases for form widget functionalities and validations.
	- Refined iframe widget tests to verify different aspects separately.
- Adjusted image widget tests and input widget tests for improved
validation and functionality checks.

- **Chores**
- Updated tags.js file to reflect the latest tagging conventions for
tests.

- **Style**
- Standardized formatting across various test suites to maintain code
cleanliness and readability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:24:59 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
59f4d9d422
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.JS, @tag.Perf, @tag.Settings, @tag.PropertyPane, @tag.Theme (#29682)
## Description
> Added tags to cases in 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/PropertyPane
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ThemingTests
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Refactoring
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ProductRamps
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Performance
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/PeekOverlay


#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS, @tag.Perf, @tag.Settings,
@tag.PropertyPane, @tag.Theme"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test categorization with the addition of tags for better
filtering and identification across various test suites.
- Improved readability and maintenance of test cases through
reformatting and restructuring.
- Updated test suite options for improved test coverage and
identification.

- **Refactor**
- Optimized test setup and execution logic for several feature-related
test suites.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Adjusted test cases to accurately reflect application behavior,
particularly in toast message validation and property setting scenarios.

- **Documentation**
- Added comments for clarity in test code to aid in understanding test
case intent and functionality.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:18:23 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
78514dcbac
test: Cypress - tag - @tag.MobileResponsive (#29678)
## Description
> Added tags to cases in 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/MobileResponsiveTests/

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.MobileResponsive"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced mobile responsiveness test suites with additional tags and
assertions to ensure consistent behavior across various devices.
- Improved test structure for clarity and better simulation of user
interactions on mobile viewports.
- Increased coverage for widget dimension validations after viewport
changes.

- **Refactor**
- Reorganized test cases and logic for a more streamlined testing
process.

- **Documentation**
- Updated test descriptions and added comments for better understanding
of test purpose and functionality.

- **Chores**
- Adjusted test suite setups and teardowns for optimized test execution.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:15:29 +05:30
Saroj
cf53dbfb23
ci: Allow static split of cypress specs (#29653)
## Description
- Allowing static split of cypress specs in CI runs.
- Optimised the spec allocation by considering the duration history for
each spec.
- Updated the affecting workflows to utilise the static split

#### Type of change
- Workflows
- Cypress-split pugin
## Testing
- Workflow run

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **New Features**
- Introduced a new environment variable to optimize test resource
allocation during CI/CD processes.
- Enhanced Cypress testing with dynamic and static test splitting
strategies.

- **Refactor**
- Refactored Cypress plugin configuration to support conditional test
splitting based on the environment variable.

- **Chores**
- Updated GitHub Actions workflows to include new environment variables
for test runs.

- **Documentation**
- Updated internal documentation to reflect changes in test setup and
execution strategies.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:10:11 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
0b4fe0dd10
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.JSONForm, @tag.List, @tag.Widget (#29690)
## Description
> Added tags to cases 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/JSONForm - @tag.JSONForm,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/List - @tag.List,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/ListV2 - @tag.List,
@tag.Widget

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JSONForm,  @tag.List"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Refactor**
- Enhanced testing suites for the JSON Form and List widgets with
improved categorization and readability.
- Improved test cases for field visibility, disabling, default values,
and widget functionality across various components.

- **Tests**
- Added new test cases to cover additional scenarios for JSON Form
fields and List widget interactions.
	- Refined existing tests to increase reliability and coverage.

- **Documentation**
- Updated test suite descriptions with tags for better organization and
clarity.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:06:45 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
bae69cddb4
test: Cypress - @tag.Video, @tag.Container, @tag.Switch, @tag.Slider, @tag.Tab, @tag.Table, @tag.Select (#29698)
## Description
> Added tags to cases 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/ContainerTest2_spec.ts -
@tag.Container, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Switch - @tag.Switch
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Sliders - @tag.Slider,
@tag.Widget
-  cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Tab - @tag.Tab, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TableV1 - @tag.Table,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TableV2, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Video, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/TreeSelect - @tag.Select,
@tag.Widget

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
>
## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Container, @tag.Video, @tag.Table, @tag.Switch"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suites for Radio, Rating, and Select widgets with
metadata tags for improved categorization and filtering.
- Updated test descriptions and restructured test cases for better
clarity and organization.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:05:27 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
f5fdec13f6
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Audio, @tag.Button, @tag.Camera, @tag.Chart and @tag.Widget (#29685)
## Description
> Added tags 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Audio - @tag.Audio,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Button - @tag.Button,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Camera - @tag.Camera,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Chart - @tag.Chart,
@tag.Widget

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget"
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Camera"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suites for Audio Recorder, Button, Camera, and Chart
widgets with additional assertions and validations.
- Added new test cases for various widget properties and events,
including style properties, form settings, and camera modes.
- Reorganized and reformatted existing test suites for improved
readability and maintainability.

- **Documentation**
- Updated test descriptions to include tags for better categorization
and traceability.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Modified test logic to ensure thorough verification of widget
functionalities and event triggers.

- **Refactor**
  - Reorganized test cases into individual `it` blocks for clarity.
  - Adjusted test control flows for more precise behavior validation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:04:15 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
d8a818686e
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Settings, @tag.Binding (#29684)
## Description
> Added tags 
-  cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/UserProfile/ - @tag.Settings
-  cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/VisualTests/ - @tag.Settings
-  cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Walkthrough/ - @tag.Binding

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)


## Testing
>/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Settings, @tag.Binding"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress

## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced the "Update User Picture" end-to-end test to include checks
for "Remove" text and file upload functionality.
- Introduced a new test case to handle and validate error messages for
invalid file uploads.
- Updated the "Update User's Name" test suite with a settings tag for
better categorization.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:03:54 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
2802efcbb2
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.IDE, @tag.JS (#29674)
## Description
> Added tags to cases in 
-  cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/IDE
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/JSObject


#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.IDE" 

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suite descriptions and added categorization tags for
better filtering.
- Improved test code structure and added explanatory comments for
increased clarity and maintainability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 17:01:22 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
3d1828de2a
test: Cypress - added @tag.Checkbox, @tag.Scanner, @tag.Datepicker, @tag.DocumentViewer, @tag.CurrencyInput, @tag.Dropdown (#29687)
## Description
> Added tags to 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Checkbox - @tag.Checkbox,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/CodeScanne - @tag.Scanner,
@tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/CurrencyInput -
@tag.CurrencyInput, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Datepicker -
@tag.Datepicker, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/DocumentViewer -
@tag.DocumentViewer, @tag.Widget
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Widgets/Dropdown - @tag.Dropdown,
@tag.Widget


#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Widget" 
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Scanner,@tag.Checkbox" 

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress

## 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
2023-12-18 16:59:48 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
f793fb58f0
fix: put wds theme provider under feature flag (#29659)
## Description
Put WDS theme provider under the feature flag so that WDS don't affect
prod anymore.

Also fix this 
![CleanShot 2023-12-15 at 13 50
29@2x](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/c1421c67-9605-4912-b8d4-c9203758ac6a)

**How it look like now**

WDS enabled
![Снимок экрана 2023-12-15 в 14 34
54](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/3e3d4c05-cc3f-4222-95eb-b90a50e0117f)
![Снимок экрана 2023-12-15 в 14 34
59](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/718ab285-8700-41d0-b9bc-e60546592b76)


WDS disabled
![Снимок экрана 2023-12-15 в 14 35
59](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/7b7de78f-0b71-4197-bd2e-c42f60fd2b63)
![Снимок экрана 2023-12-15 в 14 36
03](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/5c5fe2fa-7547-4f6a-a8f2-bdf193f3b6e5)

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **Refactor**
  - Improved feature flag naming for clarity in the app viewer settings.
  - Simplified theme background color application in the editor canvas.
- Centralized rendering logic for editor canvas components for better
maintainability.

- **Style**
- Streamlined the application of themes to ensure consistent background
colors across the platform.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 14:16:00 +03:00
Ayush Pahwa
848afaf878
feat: workflows create js object code split (#29627)
Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetunandu@gmail.com>
2023-12-18 16:45:18 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
88a50e58d2
chore: Editor Pane Segments completion (#29688)
Completes the List and Add states of Queries / JS / UI of Page Pane
Segments

fixes #29081
fixes #29501 

<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **New Features**
  - Introduced new URL building functions for widgets and queries.
  - Added new UI elements for creating widgets and queries.
  - Implemented new routing paths for widget and query creation.

- **Enhancements**
  - Updated text labels for clarity in various components.
  - Improved sorting logic for page pane data.
  - Enhanced global search with additional display titles.

- **Bug Fixes**
  - Corrected styling inconsistencies in the IDE's main pane.
  - Fixed routing issues for adding new queries and widgets.

- **Documentation**
  - Updated button text to reflect new features for end-users.

- **Style**
  - Applied new styles for the search bar and other UI components.

Please note that some internal code changes and refactorings have been
omitted from these notes to focus on user-facing features and
improvements.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 16:10:25 +05:30
subratadeypappu
b601b70279
chore: Refactor for crud of JS module (#29681)
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
> Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team)
>
> Please include a summary of the changes and which issue has been
fixed. Please also include relevant motivation
> and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change
>
> Links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant
to the PR
>
>
#### 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**
  - Implemented Git synchronization capabilities for action collections.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved validation and error handling for action and collection
creation and updates.

- **Refactoring**
  - Centralized logic for setting Git synchronization identifiers.
- Increased the scope of certain service fields to protected for
extended access in subclasses.

- **Documentation**
  - Corrected a typo in method documentation.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Ensured default context is provided when none is specified to prevent
errors.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 15:32:13 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
a411e27b46
test: Cypress - added tag- @tag.Binding (#29679)
## Description
> Added tags to cases in 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/OneClickBinding

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress


## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced end-to-end test coverage with new test cases and tags for
better organization.
- Improved existing test cases for the JSONForm and Table widgets,
including additional assertions and interactions.
- Synchronized test execution with application behavior through added
waits.
- Expanded test scenarios for one-click binding features across various
widgets and data sources.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 13:07:03 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
9aa94a2746
test: Cypress - added tag - @tag.AutoHeight, @tag.IDE (#29670)
## Description
> Add tags to cases in 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/DynamicHeight 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/ExplorerTests
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/EmbedSettings
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Editor

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> /ok-to-test tags="@tag.AutoHeight"

#### 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.
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] Cypress

## 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

- **Refactor**
- Reorganized test suite structures and added categorization tags to
improve test clarity and maintainability.

- **Style**
- Reformatted code across multiple test files for better readability and
consistency.

- **Tests**
- Enhanced existing test cases with additional assertions for element
visibility and CSS attribute values.
- Adjusted test control flows and logic for dynamic height and width
validation across various widgets.
- Updated test descriptions and restructured test steps to align with
testing best practices.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 12:45:44 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
a436d81aea
chore: split for overlay changes on EE to accommodate module instance (#29647)
## Description

 split for overlay changes on EE to accommodate module instance 


#### 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 a new navigation data retrieval function to enhance
navigation within the app.

- **Refactor**
- Improved the `getEntitiesForNavigation` function to integrate new
navigation data.

- **Documentation**
- Updated import statements to reflect collaborative features between
different app modules.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 12:42:36 +05:30
Trisha Anand
bb6b767682
Merge pull request #29671 from appsmithorg/release
18/12 Daily Promotion
2023-12-18 11:59:30 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
87a928a168
test: Cypess - added tags - @tag.Fork, @tag.Git (#29672)
## Description
> Added tags to cases in 
- cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Fork
- client/cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Git


#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
>/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Fork"

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [x] Cypress
>
>

## 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

- **Refactor**
- Improved the structure and readability of test suites related to
forking applications.

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test descriptions and categorization with new tags for better
test management.
- Added new test scenarios for forking applications by non-signed users
and checking application properties post-fork.

- **Chores**
- Introduced new tags for test suites to facilitate automated test
height adjustment and forking feature identification.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-18 11:56:21 +05:30
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
e6ebfbaea1
fix: Remove Server header and allow all on port 80 (#29585)
Another attempt at #29550, which was reverted. Fallback is not happening
if cert provisioning fails _despite_ having the correct header. But with
the changes in this PR, since we'll listen on `:80`, fallback _will_
happen when cert provisioning fails due to incorrect domain
configuration.

We're also adding [Hurl](https://hurl.dev) based tests. They're not run
in any CI yet. That'll come in soon.
2023-12-18 09:44:31 +05:30
Nidhi
148c958db8
ci: Remove conflict introduced for test (#29666) 2023-12-16 01:08:31 +05:30
Nidhi
acddbc1920
test: introduce conflict (#29665) 2023-12-16 00:43:39 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
3495346965
ci: Added cron at 6 am ist on tbp ce workflow (#29643)
## Description
> Added a cron job for the TBP workflow to run at 6 am on weekdays-
Daily Promotion analysis purpose

#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
- To check if the workflow is triggered as expected 

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual


## 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
2023-12-15 19:04:15 +05:30
sharanya-appsmith
d0de9c2fbe
test: Cypress - added tags - @tag.Git, @tag.JS, @tag.Binding, @tag.Datasource, @tag.ImportExport (#29516)
Renamed testcases starting with Bug to appropriate Feature_Bug eg
DS_Bug, JS_Bug etc. and tagged them.

Reverted the airgap change made to 
1.
cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/AdminSettings/Admin_settings_spec.js
2. cypress/e2e/Regression/ClientSide/Autocomplete/Bugs_AC_Spec.ts

Run Binding test cases -` /ok-to-test tags="@tag. Binding"`
Run JS test cases -   `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS"`
Run ImportExport test cases -  ` /ok-to-test tags="@tag.ImportExport"`
Run Binding test cases -   `/ok-to-test tags="@tag.Binding"`
Few more datasource testcases added - `/ok-to-test
tags="@tag.Datasource"`
To run both Git and Datasource tagged testcases -` /ok-to-test
tags="@tag.Datasource,@tag.Git"`


>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)

## Testing
> Ran ok to test with multiple tags
#### 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
- [x] Cypress
>
>

## 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

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test suite descriptions with relevant tags for better
categorization and filtering.
- Added new test cases for various bug verifications, ensuring features
like datasource interactions, API executions, and widget bindings work
as expected.
- Improved existing test cases with additional steps and assertions to
cover more scenarios and edge cases.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Implemented test cases to verify fixes for specific bugs related to
data source configurations, JavaScript object parsing, and UI component
behaviors.

- **Documentation**
- Updated test descriptions to provide clearer context and objectives
for each test suite.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
2023-12-15 18:28:26 +05:30