41445c7592
10 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
balajisoundar
|
2608e3dbd3
|
chore: Move the widget config to widget class (#26073)
## Description - Remove the config objects from widget and config maps from the widget factory. - Introduce methods in widget development API to dynamically fetch this items. - freeze the widget configuration. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26008 > 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 - [x] Manual - [ ] 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 - [x] 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 - [x] 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 |
||
|
albinAppsmith
|
629999f124
|
feat: [epic] appsmith design system version 2 deduplication (#22030)
## Description ### Fixes - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19383 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19384 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19385 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19386 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19387 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19388 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19389 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19390 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19391 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19392 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19393 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19394 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19395 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19396 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19397 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19398 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19399 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19400 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19401 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19402 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19403 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19404 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19405 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19406 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19407 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19408 - [x] https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19409 Fixes # (issue) > 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 ## How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Provide instructions, so we can reproduce. > Please also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not important - Manual - 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: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: akash-codemonk <67054171+akash-codemonk@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Arsalan <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rohit Agarwal <rohit_agarwal@live.in> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <nilesh@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Tanvi Bhakta <tanvibhakta@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <vijetha@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi <80334441+Parthvi12@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Apple <nandan@thinkify.io> Co-authored-by: Saroj <43822041+sarojsarab@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sangeeth Sivan <74818788+berzerkeer@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya-U-R <91450662+Aishwarya-U-R@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <119562824+Vijetha-Kaja@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
ae05e93ec9
|
chore: Removing feature flag for app level invites (#22650)
## Description Removing feature flag for app-level invites. Also, updating import statements to use `@appsmith/..` instead of `ce/..` Fixes [#22657](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/22657) ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - 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: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
c2dbebf9b7
|
fix: Do not set widget ancestry if selection happens via canvas (#22069)
## Description Implemented in #21317. A problem arose where if a widget that exists inside a tabs widget is setting the default value of the tab in order to navigate change the tab, it would fail to switch it because the selected widget logic takes over. > Improve selected widget visibility by skipping feature when selection happens via a canvas click Fixes #22070 Media https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12022471/229714138-55f89cda-3c27-4953-91c0-46f5a9834adf.mov ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - 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: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
c28bea180c
|
fix: Selected Widget Visibility (#21317)
## Description ### Part 3 of selected widget refactor As part of context switching and selected widget refactor, we saw that widgets that are inside modals or tabs and are hidden cannot be switched to without updating some meta properties. The meta properties are actually owned by the end user and the developer user would create some default values for it as well. This becomes a problem soon when the platform also tries to update it. So as part of this refactor, we will use the selected widget ancestry (the chain of widgets from the top to the currently selected widget) to handle if widgets need to be visible or not. It will also indicate the widgets in the path of selection to "make way" for the selected widget to be seen. Media https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/12022471/224916943-b10e8694-0c95-4157-bb93-288d7c0bf60a.mov - This works on any number of levels of hirarchy - The logic is supposed to handled by each widget that can potentially hide other widgets inside it - Improves some platform perf as the handing so widget meta is not done by the platform anymore Affected widgets: - Modal Widget - Tabs Widget > tl;dr: Update the platform's way to show widgets that can be hidden. Makes sure a selected widget is always shown. Fixes #1282 Resolves #18173 ## Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Cypress ### Test Plan > Test case link:- [#2202](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2202) ### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity:- https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/1282#issuecomment-1472204952 ## 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 - [x] 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: - [x] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test |
||
|
Ivan Akulov
|
424d2f6965
|
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
## Description
This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import
type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export)
syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge
it easily.
As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily:
- add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and
- re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes:
https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes
This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team
members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer
conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll
merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is
merged.)
### Why is this needed?
This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from
|
||
|
Preet Sidhu
|
75cf47b8c5
|
feat: Auto layout appsmith editor and mobile responsiveness (#21151)
## Description Core features of Auto Layout and mobile responsiveness, hidden under a feature flag. > Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team) 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. - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? > Manual regression and sanity tests for all fixed canvas functionality. - Manual - Jest - 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Arsalan <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
721767d742
|
feat: URL Navigation for Widgets (#20202)
## Description Widget selection is driven by URL changes. This would fix browser navigation for users as they can use browser back/forward buttons to travel across older contexts on Appsmith. > Fixing browser URL navigation for widgets Fixes #19571 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. - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - Jest - Cypress ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith [test cases](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2171) links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing - [X] When a selected widget is below viewport and user refreshes the page, then the widget property pane is open but the page does not navigate to the selected widget https://loom.com/share/09f1eda2f02d474981a0d48e4a6419ec - [ ] Drop 2 widgets one at a time > Delete both the widgets > Now click on back button of the browser > Observe the url it shows the widget id in the URL but the canvas remains empty https://loom.com/share/53cae28a5d224e67b783c8ccf53745f5 Dev Response: This issue is valid but not a major inconvenience. We will try to track it and see if it needed to be addressed. Many other web tools do not handle such cases - [X] Canvas scrolls down when all widgets are selected. https://loom.com/share/c8a68dadcdb040779abd3a73bde2b06c - [X] Widget is not getting highlighted when added from the API editor page. Please refer to the attached video:-https://jiju8jbmwa.vmaker.com/record/IkwiAqFgafK9dVmu ## 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: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [x] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
ashit-rath
|
a47dba5e26
|
feat: List V2 (#15839)
## Description TL;DR This is a complete architectural change of of List widget works to support all widgets we currently have and should automatically support any future widgets. It also introduces nested List widgets i.e a list widget can have a another list widget which in turn can have another list widget. Fixes #18206 Fixes #6775 Fixes #13211 Fixes #16582 Fixes #11739 Fixes #15094 Fixes #6840 Fixes #10841 Fixes #17386 Fixes #18340 Fixes #16898 Fixes #17555 Fixes #6858 Fixes #9568 Fixes #17480 Fixes #18523 Fixes #18206 Fixes #16586 Fixes #18106 Fixes #16576 Fixes #14697 Fixes #9607 Fixes #19648 Fixes #19739 Fixes #19652 Fixes #18730 Fixes #19503 Fixes #19498 Fixes #19437 Fixes #5245 Fixes #19150 Fixes #18638 Fixes #11332 Fixes #17901 Fixes #19043 Fixes #17777 Fixes #8237 Fixes #15487 Fixes #15988 Fixes #18621 Fixes #16788 Fixes #18110 Fixes #18382 Fixes #17427 Fixes #18105 Fixes #18287 Fixes #19808 Fixes #14655 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Cypress - Jest - Manual ## Checklist: - [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 - [x] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Tolulope Adetula <31691737+Tooluloope@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Favour Ohanekwu <fohanekwu@gmail.com> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
aa9b19c995
|
refactor: Widget Selection (#19643)
## Description This change is a refactor of widget selection logic. It consolidates all the business logic to make it easy to maintain. It also improves the performance a bit. It touched a lot of features as we heavily rely on this ``` Select one Select multiple with drag Select multiple with shift Select multiple with cmd/ctrl Selections should be on the same level of hierarchy Unselect all by clicking on the canvas Unselect all by pressing esc Select all with cmd + a Paste in main container Paste in another container Undo Redo Modal Selection Modal child selection Context switching cmd click snipping mode new widget suggestion onboarding ``` > Refactor widget selection logic Fixes #19570 ## Type of change - Refactor ## How Has This Been Tested? All existing tests should pass ### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR ### Issues raised during DP testing https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383570810 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1383607820 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/19643#issuecomment-1385095478 [Bug bash issues](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/610aa302f3e146a7b090b7dc6bc63ef9?v=0d277a9b07bf4aac9d717bcaf138c33a) ## 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: - [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or manual QA - [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after Round 1/2 of QA - [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test |
