6c0dc2e89f
31 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Dipyaman Biswas
|
6c0dc2e89f
|
feat: code split files based on feature flags (#27678)
## Description Add feature flag based logic for code splitted files #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #2237 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## 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 - [x] 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 |
||
|
sneha122
|
7585a39325
|
fix: import issue with workspace id fixed (#27653)
## Description In a case where we are inside an application, then we come back to home page and add a new workspace and try importing application in that newly created workspace, the workspace Id that is being sent along with test API is workspaceId of previous workspace and not the new one. This PR fixes that issue. Issue occurs because for test API we are sending workspaceId which we get from redux state. Whenever we enter inside any application, we set the currentWorkspace object inside state, this object contains data about current workspace, but when we leave the application and come back to home page, we are not resetting this currentWorkspace object, it still contains stale data, hence when we create new workspace and import application, it gets workspace id from this stale object. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27594 > 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 - 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 1. Login to appsmith, create a new app in a new workspace. Now come back to home page, and create a new workspace and then import an application. The reported error should no longer appear 2. Tried with new workspace, new app created and app level import. Here also the error does not appear. 3. Tried forking an app into a new workspace. Here also error does not occur > > #### 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 - [ ] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
ashit-rath
|
f29cefaf0b
|
chore: refactor workspace homepage loading state (#27433)
## Description This PR refactors the rendering of loading state of application in the workspace homepage to facilitate the packages loading state in EE. Fixes #26883 In this PR 2 new components are introduced 1. CardList - This component renders the title and couple of wrapper components and accepts a list of cards as children. This component is separated out as it is used at 3 different places (ApplicationCardList, ResourceListLoader and PackageCardList - EE) 2. ResourceListLoader - The purpose of this is just to show the loading state of the applications. This helps decouple the loading state which was deeply embedded inside the ApplicationCardList and conditionally renders based on application and package fetching state. #### Note to QA This PR introduces no visual changes to the workspace homepage. Under the hood it just modifies how the loader shows, so a manual verification can be done on that. #### 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 - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [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 |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
1c7cca908c
|
chore: Updating instance admin emails input field to tag input field for better UX (#27410)
## Description Updating instance admin emails input field to tag input field for better UX #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#27418](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/27418) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] 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: - [ ] [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 |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
c6a666db45
|
fix: changed the button text to new when no apps are present in workspace (#27392) | ||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
c58ad05cbd
|
fix: Make manage users sentence cased & handle mobile UI when top banner is seen (#27338)
## Description Make manage users sentence cased & handle mobile UI when top banner is seen #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#27339](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/27339) #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - 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 |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
3fc29dc459
|
feat: functionality to delete multiple apps at once (#26750) | ||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
26558f44a3
|
fix: Adding invite to app permission to fix share modal getting auto-closed issue (#27106)
## Description A public app that the logged-in user doesn't have access to was auto-closing the share modal when opened. This was happening because we were fetching workspace even when the user did not have the invite to app permission. This is now fixed with this PR. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#26870](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26870) #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## 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 |
||
|
ashit-rath
|
d7a8a39ebf
|
chore: Workspace home page refactor for packages (#26654)
## Description This is a refactor PR that helps introducing the packages section in EE. Apart from refactor there are some design changes that are made (refer figma design and the `Design changes` list). Refactor list - - Applications list extracted from the index file to it's own component (`ApplicationCardList.tsx`) - Extracted `+ New` button to a new component to override in EE (`WorkspaceAction.tsx`). - Created and moved workspace context menu just de-clutter the main Application page (`WorkspaceMenu.tsx`) - Mixed packages into the fuzzy search logic with dummy package selector logic (EE will have the main logic) - Extracted common Card logic from ApplicationCard component to reuse for packages. (`Card.tsx`) - Design changes - - Search bar increased width to `500px` - Workspace heading font size decreased to 16px - Workspace heading text color - Application card name font size decreased to 16px - Gap between application cards decreased to 12px - Added a horizontal divider between each workspace [Figma Design](https://www.figma.com/file/Z0QsSdGOydURn6WIMQ3rHM/Solution-Design?type=design&node-id=1171-91563&mode=design&t=GTnV1fZa5ODy8xGD-0) Fixes #26497 #### Type of change - 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 - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] 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 --------- Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
bb2bf36481
|
fix: App card layout shifting & dropdown options for longer labels (#26722)
## Description Fixing: - App cards layout shifting on Firefox browser - Dropdown options for longer labels not showing ellipsis - On leave workspace, the page should not reload. Flow should be same as delete workspace action - Remove tooktip on loader workspaces on left pane. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#16706](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/16706) [#16873](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/16873) [#16416](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/16416) [#24736](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/24736) #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] 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: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
ce9c32cb92
|
chore: Improve code splitting of FE components (#26659)
## Description Improve code splitting of FE components to avoid minimal changes needed on EE when CE is modified. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#24184](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/24184) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] 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 |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
9e5a38b3d9
|
chore: Move saving of branding config to tenant config (#26316)
## Description Move saving of branding config to tenant config #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] 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 |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
d58c7ff8d3
|
fix: Resetting the search keyword when the user un-mounts from the home page (#26060)
## Description - Resetting the search keyword when the user un-mounts from the home page - Moving business and enterprise tags to components #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#24972](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/24972) #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] 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: - [ ] [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 |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
e0edd068f6
|
chore: Optimising the code for admin settings page (#25404)
## Description #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#25264](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/25264) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] 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 |
||
|
Ankit Srivastava
|
3f3671dff0
|
feat: in-app ramps for private embed feature (#24507)
Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
0d1d9c6781
|
fix: Updating the to function in embed snippet tab component (#23831)
## Description Updating the to function in embed snippet tab component #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] 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/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#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 |
||
|
Tanvi Bhakta
|
4fca7da51d
|
fix: ads-v2 fixes (#23543)
## Description Notion Issues: 1. Issues with link component: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=4121a76714cb49f2ba76d20fbeab9766&pm=s 2. GraphQL code editor heading color: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=82bbeaa2749642268eada28fcf5ec6a6&pm=s 3. tooltip on long JS Object names: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=353552b086de45329390bd4dfae98ee4&pm=s 4. Multiple scroll bars on response tab: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=111515d90ec5447687b1b573d64bd6eb&pm=s 5. Save and delete buttons: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=1ac1fed293994b51b4c31bc44dd2d736&pm=s 6. Js Objects always on tooltip: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=59f3e5b452d24ab9aa05e9fdd169113f&pm=s 7. Error message alignment: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/f353d8c6bd664f79ad858a42010cdfc8?v=f04cde23f6424aeb9d5a6e389cd172bd&p=a6f2cc4e79994b77894c0293d50be3b9&pm=s 8. Max width of field on Admin settings page: https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Text-boxes-too-small-in-Auth-Pages-ef2d0fb97f8247848113f9a419e3da09?pvs=4 Other issues: 1. Added data testid for branch create spinner. 7. Fix: branch name button have a fixed width even if text length is small. #### 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 - [ ] 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/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Parthvi Goswami <parthvigoswami@Parthvis-MacBook-Pro.local> Co-authored-by: akash-codemonk <67054171+akash-codemonk@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <vijetha@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Apple <nandan@thinkify.io> Co-authored-by: Arsalan Yaldram <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: albinAppsmith <87797149+albinAppsmith@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aman Agarwal <aman@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Sangeeth Sivan <74818788+berzerkeer@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Saroj <43822041+sarojsarab@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya-U-R <91450662+Aishwarya-U-R@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Parthvi <80334441+Parthvi12@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Vijetha-Kaja <119562824+Vijetha-Kaja@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ayush Pahwa <ayushpahwa96@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Rohit Agarwal <rohit_agarwal@live.in> |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
87354cbdcc
|
feat: deprecate duplicate button (#23461)
## Description We have `Fork` and `Duplicate` options which essentially do the same thing, the former one provides us more flexibility, hence we are removing the `Duplicate` option completely from our app. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #13169 #### Media #### Type of change - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Cypress - [x] Manual #### 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/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [x] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#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 - [x] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [x] 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> |
||
|
Satish Gandham
|
83538ad74d
|
feat: Bundle optimization and first load improvements (#21667)
Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <mail@iamakulov.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <iamakulov@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: somangshu <somangshu.goswami1508@gmail.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 |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
2e08a913a7
|
feat: Updating invite modal & app settings for SSO embedding to introduce private app embedding (#22279)
## Description Updating invite modal and app settings for SSO embedding to introduce upgrade content for private apps. This is being done to introduce private embedding SSO in invite modal and app settings for Business Edition. Fixes [#20578](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/20578) ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual - 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 - [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: - [ ] 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: Dipyaman Biswas <dipyaman@appsmith.com> |
||
|
NandanAnantharamu
|
fea88972fc
|
test: Tests for auto conversion and mobile viewport (#21931)
covered use-cases documented in https://www.notion.so/AutoLayout-cypress-tests-b66ef64b1d6543fb80264358f320d27c --------- Co-authored-by: Arsalan Yaldram <arsalanyaldram0211@outlook.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Preet <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Nandan <nandan@thnikify.io> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
47c09cef92
|
chore: Code splitting FE files to support app level invites on Business edition (#21783)
## Description > Code splitting FE files to support app level invites on Business edition. Fixes [#21018](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/21018) [#21015](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/21015) ## Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? > Nothing is affected on CE by this change. - Manual ## 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 |
||
|
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
|
||
|
Rishabh Rathod
|
f846122a37
|
chore: remove unnecessary skeleton component (#20645)
## Description Remove unnecessary skeleton for the static UI in the home page's Left pane. Media https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/23132741/219005309-76226c00-e433-4b0e-a796-f1ce0f578b33.mov ## Type of change - Chore ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual ### 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: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Sangeeth Sivan
|
ad5d236a05
|
chore: [Usage & billing] change upgrade hook link and refactor upgrade to BE page (#20312)
## Description Updates the redirection link when the user clicks on `Upgrade`. Also renders the background in CSS instead of using still image as an placeholder. Fixes #20313 Media  ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual ## Checklist: ### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag ### QA activity: - [ ] 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 |
||
|
Sangeeth Sivan
|
34669c6a68
|
chore: make CE applications class component as base component (#20072)
## Description When code splitting class components, extends from CE class to avoid code duplication and code inconsistency issues. Fixes [#19785](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/19785) ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual ## 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 - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag |
||
|
albinAppsmith
|
110e6085b8
|
feat: Renamed design system package (#19854)
## Description This PR includes changes for renaming design system package. Since we are building new package for the refactored design system components, the old package is renaming to design-system-old. Fixes #19536 ## Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## How Has This Been Tested? - 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 - [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 - [ ] 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 |
||
|
Nirmal Sarswat
|
5e97eec525
|
feat: adding new api for release items (#18966)
On User Home Page, we show `what's new` and that release items information use to be part of `/application/new` API. Now we are extracting release items info and creating new API for it which is `/application/releaseItems`. |
||
|
Sangeeth Sivan
|
ac5997cfe4
|
chore: code split usage and billing files (#19436)
## Description Since Usage & Billing is EE only, there are a few components which needs to be code splitted. So code splitted those files and also added feature flag for Usage & Billing. TL;DR Code split usage and billing files Fixes [#146](https://github.com/appsmithorg/cloud-services/issues/146) ## Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Code splitting ## How Has This Been Tested? - Manual ## 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 - [ ] 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 |
