Protei/PromucFlow_constructor
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 3 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
18,511 Commits 1 Branch 0 Tags 507 MiB
7aae152dee
Commit Graph

182 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Abhinav Jha
1ea5938cef
feat: Asymmetric padding in Anvil (#30964) 
## Description
To make the Anvil layout system capable of rendering dense layouts,
we're using asymmetric padding to remove paddings when not necessary. It
works as follows
- If a section doesn't have a background, it doesn't have a padding
- If all zones in a section don't have a background, they all don't have
vertical padding

Other changes:
- Moved the logic for clearing all selections on click of Canvas from
`AnvilCanvas` to `AnvilMainCanvas`, as it is only necessary in the
editor.
- Removed default `min-height` from widgets so that changes in padding
don't misalign widgets
- Changed the selection borders to use 2px borders instead of box
shadows.
- Removed borders around widget name component
- Removed elevation shadows from zones and sections
- Removed the zone widget from showing up in the widgets panel

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #31103

#### Media
![Screenshot 2024-02-13 at 10 37
23 PM](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/103687/db1aa6bb-516d-48a8-aea9-c3af9c0d8d16)

#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] 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

- **New Features**
- Introduced a new click event listener in `AnvilMainCanvas` for
clearing selections when clicking outside a widget.
    - Added a new constant `AnvilCanvasClassName` in `constants.ts`.

- **Refactor**
- Simplified `AnvilCanvas` component by using `React.forwardRef` and
updating event handling.
- Updated logic in `useClickToClearSelections.ts` for more dynamic click
event handling.
- Enhanced `AnvilMainCanvas` with improved event handling using hooks.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Addressed issues with widget selection and border styles for a better
user experience.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-16 17:13:37 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
ae396eb976
fix: clipping issue for excessive hug widgets in an alignment (#31053) 
## Description

1. Restores the original behaviour of grow and shrink for alignments,
that had regressed after introduction of sizing tokens.
2. Fix clipping issue in alignments. If an alignments width equals or
exceeds the width of the row on larger screens, enable flex wrap.

#### 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

## 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 a new style property for `AnvilFlexComponent` to enhance
layout sizing.
- Added a function to determine if default alignment styles need to be
overridden.
- Launched a new React component for dynamic alignment of widgets within
a row, adaptable to different viewport sizes.
- **Refactor**
- Simplified the rendering process in `AlignedWidgetRow` by improving
component organization.
- Enhanced logic and structure in rendering functions for better
alignment and layout management.
- **Bug Fixes**
	- Fixed incorrect import paths in test and utility files.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-15 17:02:26 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
f7d41891b8
fix: Anvil toggleable widgets not working when native callbacks are used for AnvilFlexComponent (#31125) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description

In last weeks effort of cleaning up Editor and Viewer parts of
AnvilFlexComponent I had changed synthetic React callbacks to native
ones #30780 .
This has resulted in regression of widget toggling of widgets like
Checkbox, Switch, etc.
so changing them back to synthetic events by passing callbacks and props
to the viewer part of AnvilFlexComponent.

#### 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 testing suite for validating widget interactions in
Anvil Layout Mode, focusing on switch and checkbox widgets.
- Added new functionalities for switch and checkbox widgets, including
selection toggling and state verification.
- Enhanced Anvil editor components to support custom click behaviors,
improving widget interaction in edit mode.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Addressed issues with native click callbacks interfering with widget
events.

- **Tests**
- Added comprehensive test cases for new widget functionalities and
interactions.

- **Refactor**
- Updated internal logic for widget selection and style adjustments
based on interaction states.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-15 11:00:57 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
c655aea15c
chore: Import debugger fixes (#31080) 
## Description
To add debugger error for import path for module instance on EE, this PR
enables code to be extended on EE


#### 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**
- Updated import paths and references for `ENTITY_TYPE` to
`EntityTypeValue` across various components and utilities for improved
code consistency.
- Reorganized import statements related to `AppsmithConsole` utilities
and constants to enhance code maintainability.
- Adjusted usage of enums and types, specifically for entity and
platform error handling, to align with updated import paths.

- **New Features**
- Introduced utility functions for handling entity types and platform
errors in AppsmithConsole, including new constants and error retrieval
functions.
- Added a new enum value `MISSING_MODULE` to better categorize log types
in debugging scenarios.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Implemented changes to error logging and handling mechanisms,
including the addition of new case handling for
`LOG_TYPE.MISSING_MODULE` in debugger logs, to improve the debugging
experience.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-14 12:00:18 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
92397c4559
feat: Anvil dnd enhancement of highlight info and highlight skipping. (#30927) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are enhancing/changing a couple of things
- change skipping highlight logic.
- we skip showing vertical highlights when the only hug widget in a row
is dragged, now we show vertical highlights.
- instead of skipping the vertical highlight left to a widget which is
being dragged, we skip the highlight right to the widget so that
changing order of widgets is more intutive.
- adding new prop to highlight info to mark highlights of the existing
dragged widget so that such drops are not considered to update
widgets/layouts. This will make sure undo / redo works as expected.

#### 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**
- Enabled `ab_wds_enabled` and `release_anvil_enabled` feature flags for
all users.
- Enhanced the canvas interaction in the Anvil layout system by
introducing logic to better handle horizontal and vertical highlights,
improving the user experience during widget drag-and-drop operations.
- Modified the logic for determining overlay widgets, streamlining the
process for identifying modal and similar widgets.

- **Refactor**
- Updated feature flag selection logic to return default values more
accurately.
- Refined highlight generation logic in Anvil layout system to account
for dragged widgets and discarded layouts, offering a more intuitive
drag-and-drop experience.
- Adjusted the `getLayoutSystemType` selector to consistently return
`LayoutSystemTypes.ANVIL`, ensuring a unified layout system experience.

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test coverage for highlight selection algorithms in the Anvil
layout system, ensuring accurate highlight behavior based on mouse
position.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-13 15:47:28 +05:30
albinAppsmith
bea3333ac7
fix: Modal Widget get hidden in split screen (#31015) 
## Description

This PR fixes modal widget getting hidden while opening split screen.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31014


#### Media
Before


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/6ef7d0e7-30f4-468a-a009-5d27c9b22ce1

After


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/5b704ec0-4295-4ad0-a5d1-4aa66bb60883



#### 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
- [ ] 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**
- Simplified the modal overlay positioning for improved consistency and
reliability.
- **Style**
- Enhanced the layout stability of the Widgets Editor with new
containment settings.
- **New Features**
- Added the `getIsAutoLayout` function for improved layout control in
the App Viewer.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-13 15:10:38 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
d7cd02a45d
fix: add testing library eslint rules (#31028) 
Added recommended rules for testing library

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

- **New Features**
- Added `data-testid` attributes across various components for improved
test identification.

- **Tests**
- Enhanced test cases with asynchronous handling (`async`/`await`) for
more reliable user interaction simulations.
- Transitioned to using `getByTestId` instead of `queryByTestId` for
better assertion reliability in tests.
- Added `await` before the `userEvent.click(el)` statement in the
ChartWidget test file.
- Updated the destructured variable names from `queryByTestId` to
`getByTestId` in the DividerWidget test file for improved clarity.
- Added an import for `screen` from "@testing-library/react" and updated
element querying in the TabsWidget test file.

- **Chores**
- Updated ESLint configurations to include testing-library plugins and
rules, improving code quality and consistency in test files.
- Removed unnecessary `cleanup` function calls after tests, following
best practices for test cleanup.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-12 18:59:10 +03:00
Jacques Ikot
d22b63277d
feat: starter building blocks for all users (#30909) 
## Description
**Goal**
The starter building block on canvas experiment was a success, this PR
removes the feature from behind a feature flag and makes it available to
all users on the platform.

Summary of changes
- Remove feature flag condition in DropTarget component
- Clean up unnecessary state used to find newUsers and firstTimeUsers
- Remove redundant storage functions used for storing first time user
and application id
- Remove showStarterTemplatesInsteadofBlankCanvas prop in signUpHelper
and signUpSuccess
- 
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30903 

#### 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
- [ ] 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**
- Simplified signup process by removing the option to choose starter
templates or a blank canvas.
- Streamlined onboarding component logic and storage management for a
smoother user experience.
- Optimized import organization and removed unused functions in the
DropTargetComponent.
- Enhanced test coverage for building blocks and starter templates in
client-side templates.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com>
 2024-02-09 10:00:04 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
f14b40cef6
fix: fix modal position and styles (#30805) 
## Description
Fixes for the modal widget:
1. Added support for clickOutside. The modal is closed only by clicking
on the backdrop overlay. A click on the widget name has been added to
the exceptions for close event.
2. Fixed the positioning of the modal. Now it is located in the center
of the provider.
3. For the correct positioning of the modal, it was necessary to make
fixes for canvas height. The fixes also affect fixed and autolayout.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30788

Also fixed this
https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Canvas-gets-cut-off-on-preview-mode-525b95f26c6e4644bf5ab7389c02e434

#### Media


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/6db9ecde-595b-4fa4-a21b-9ed08930d58f


#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- 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?
> 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
- [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
- [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
- [x] 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**
- Popover and Modal components now support dismissing by clicking
outside. Custom logic and selectors can be specified to control this
behavior.
- **Enhancements**
	- Simplified logic for closing Modals by directly setting open state.
- Enhanced Modal styling options, allowing for better customization of
width and height.
	- ErrorBoundary component now supports custom styles.
- **Refactor**
- Removed redundant code and unused properties across various components
and layout systems.
- Simplified state management and styling adjustments in editor
components.
- **Style**
- Updated Modal component styles for improved layout and responsiveness.
- **Chores**
- Codebase cleanup including removal of unused classes, variables, and
adjustments for more efficient layout rendering.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-06 10:26:47 +03:00
Ashok Kumar M
c37d0c283f
fix: Anvil Widgets not accessible when widget has no content. (#30780) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR, we are fixing a few issues and also destructuring
AnvilFlexComponent for edit and view.

Issues Fixed
- Widgets without any content like a text widget without text are not
hoverable
- Modal once opened does not close when other widgets on the canvas are
selected via the enitty explorer.

Anvil Flex Component was common component inspired from
PositionedContainer of Fixed layout. It had all features of Edit and
View together in one place. This mean viewer was unnecessarily
interpreting more code.
Now AnvilFlexComponent has been broken into AnvilFlexComponent and
AnvilEditorFlexComponent.
AnvilEditorFlexComponent is a wrapper around AnvilFlexComponent with
abilities needed for Edit Mode.

Another issue addressed in the PR is removal of DraggableComponennt,
which was just making dragging possible and providing a few styles like
fading the widget when it is being dragged.
With this PR all the above mentioned functions will be taken care of by
AnvilEditorFlexComponent.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30734
> 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

## Summary by CodeRabbit

- **New Features**
- Enhanced feature flag management with additional flags for better
control over application features.
- Introduced a new editor component for Anvil layout system, improving
layout and behavior management in edit mode.
- Added a custom hook for managing hover states on Anvil widgets,
enhancing user interaction.

- **Refactor**
- Updated AnvilFlexComponent to use `forwardRef` for better ref
management and optimized widget configuration and rendering logic.
- Modified selector logic to simplify the retrieval of layout system
type, enhancing code maintainability.
	- Adjusted test methodologies to improve reliability and accuracy.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Corrected assertions in Cypress end-to-end tests to accurately locate
and interact with widgets in the Anvil canvas, ensuring test
reliability.

- **Chores**
- Updated common locators and assertion methods in Cypress support files
for consistency and clarity in test scripts.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-02-05 18:00:50 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
6765888eb0
chore: Anvil cypress tests (#30580) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this pr we are writing tests to validate a few preliminary cases of
the Anvil Editor.
the purpose of the task is to be able to run anvil tests along side the
present suite of test cases.
Things to note for Anvil based test cases
- ANVIL_EDITOR_TEST tag is used for Anvil based tests to make sure
relevant feature flags are set(using featureFlagIntercept) before
creating pages so that Anvil pages are created.
- each test case in a Anvil spec file also use featureFlagIntercept to
set the relevant flags since pages are reloded before running tests.
#### 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**
- Enhanced Anvil editor with the ability to test app navigation, drag
and drop functionality, and suggested widgets feature.
- Improved accessibility and interaction capabilities within the Anvil
canvas.
- **Tests**
- Added comprehensive end-to-end tests for new Anvil editor features,
including app navigation settings, widget drag and drop, and suggested
widgets integration.
- **Refactor**
- Introduced new constants and locators for better test structure and
readability.
- **Style**
- Updated components with new attributes for improved accessibility and
testing.
- **Chores**
	- Added new tags for organizing tests related to the Anvil editor.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-31 11:02:38 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
dcabb56503
fix: Anvil editor zone stretch fix in mobile mode (#30592) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR, we are making sure zones don't stretch to fill sections in
low resolution screens exclusively on the Appsmith Anvil Editor.

#### 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**
- Enhanced the canvas interaction experience in the Anvil layout system
for better usability.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed an issue with incorrect `minWidth` settings for widgets,
improving responsiveness and layout accuracy on mobile devices.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-29 19:23:15 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
e67f6a8f89
feat: WDS - Anvil compatible Modal Widget (#30351) 
## Description
This PR primarily adds the modal widget to WDS.
The following changes were made:
1. WidgetNameCanvas now listens to modal body scrolls to position widget
name components correctly
2. Modal Widget is rendered as a detached widget that is outside of the
layout flow of the main canvas
3. Main container resizer now has a higher z-index to show even if the
modal is open in the preview mode
4. Widget selection flow in Anvil layout system has been modified to be
handled in a central location (`AnvilMainCanvas`)
5. Modal widget's type in modal sagas are selected via a selector that
checks for the feature flag.
6. Modal widget has its own preset that (at present) is similar to the
Main container's layout preset


#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28588 
Fixes #28328 
Fixes #27459 

#### Media


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/103687/bf350be4-2202-49f3-a860-3e38681ab32e


#### Type of change

- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- This change requires a documentation update

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

- **New Features**
- Enhanced Modal components with additional styling and customization
options.
  - Introduced a new event type for modal submission actions.
- Added a `--on-canvas-ui-z-index` CSS variable for improved layering
control.
  - Implemented a new method for widget focus management in the editor.

- **Improvements**
  - Modal components now use context hooks for close actions.
  - Improved the handling of detached widgets in various layout systems.
  - Simplified the drag-and-drop state management for widgets.
  - Upgraded the visual presentation of the widget drop area.
  - Enhanced widget selection with new custom event dispatching.
- Updated the modal widget configuration with default settings and
property pane structure.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed an issue with modal scrolling to behave consistently with the
main container.
- Addressed a problem where the `id` was not found during layout element
position updates.

- **Style**
- Adjusted modal overlay positioning and content width with new CSS
standards.
- Updated zIndex references to use CSS variables for consistent styling.

- **Refactor**
- Reorganized the `Widgets` array into categorized groups for better
clarity.
- Simplified the `modalPreset` function's parameters and layout
declaration.

- **Documentation**
  - Added default values for feature flags in the documentation.

- **Chores**
  - Altered feature flags to enable new functionalities by default.

- **Tests**
  - No visible changes to end-users in this category.

- **Revert**
  - No visible changes to end-users in this category.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Valera Melnikov <valera@appsmith.com>
 2024-01-26 09:30:57 +05:30
Ankit Srivastava
a45dcfa61f
feat: Homepage experience v2 changes (#29282) 
> 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**
    - Added new workspace search functionality in the search bar.
    - Introduced a help button for user assistance.
- Implemented new UI components for workspace selection and management.
    - Enhanced application card with edit permission checks.
- Integrated workspace actions for creating and fetching workspaces
directly from the UI.

- **Improvements**
    - Improved workspace and application fetching logic.
    - Enhanced Global Search with updated import paths and logic.
- Refined the layout and styling of the applications page and sub-header
components.
- Optimized workspace-related sagas and reducers for better performance
and maintainability.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed tooltip functionality in "Reconnect Datasources" within
templates.
    - Corrected test logic for forking templates and applications.
    - Updated Cypress test commands for consistency and reliability.
- Addressed issues with application URL test cases and workspace import
logic.

- **Documentation**
- Updated messages and constants related to workspace and application UI
elements for clearer user communication.

- **Chores**
- Cleaned up unused code and simplified selectors across various
components and tests.
- Refactored application and workspace selectors for improved code
organization.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Dipyaman Biswas <dipyaman@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Abhijeet <abhi.nagarnaik@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Nidhi <nidhi@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Goutham Pratapa <goutham@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: albinAppsmith <87797149+albinAppsmith@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Nayan <nayan@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Rishabh Rathod <rishabh.rathod@appsmith.com>
 2024-01-25 19:11:48 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
c396fc5499
feat: Add copy paste functionality for Anvil. (#30217) 
## Description

1. Copy paste functionality for Anvil.
2. Handle automatic creation of sections and zones based on different
scenarios.
3. Handle space distribution on paste.

#### 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

## 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
- [ ] 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 a new paste functionality for widgets within the Anvil
layout system.

- **Improvements**
  - Refined widget movement logic to accommodate different canvas types.
- Expanded widget pasting capabilities with additional checks and
operations.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Addressed potential issues with dragging blocks by ensuring existence
checks before mapping.

- **Refactor**
- Streamlined sagas for widget operations to better align with the Anvil
layout system.
- Consolidated widget position utility functions for more efficient
layout management.

- **User Interface**
- Implemented user-friendly error messaging for paste operations that
fail.

- **Documentation**
- Updated messages and constants to support new paste functionality and
error handling.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
 2024-01-24 21:55:08 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
10a98f9563
fix: use wds tokens in sections and zones (#30479) 
## Description
- Added tokens to the anvil config
- Removed redundant functions for calculating widget sizes
- I cleaned the widget configs
- Added a zero-state to the input component
- Optimised the responsiveness of the action group component


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/e9e0513a-cf3f-42ef-b960-820bb4980858

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29507 

#### 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)
- 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
- [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
- [x] 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**
- Enhanced `MenuItem` display with additional text attribute for better
accessibility.
- Improved user interaction with `TextArea` and `TextInput` components
through more effective handling of default and read-only states.
- Extended `Flex` component to include click event handling
capabilities.
- Refined `ActionGroup` styling and dynamic sizing for a more polished
UI experience.

- **Enhancements**
- Updated `Button` styling to ensure consistency across different screen
sizes.
- Optimized layout and styling of `Menu` items for improved visual
hierarchy and responsiveness.

- **Refactor**
- Simplified `WidgetProvider` and `AnvilEditorWidget` configurations for
more streamlined layout management.
- Refined `ZoneColumn` rendering for better alignment with layout system
principles.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed minimum width calculation in `useZoneMinWidth` hook to ensure
correct layout behavior.
- Corrected `AnvilDSLTransformer` padding value for consistent widget
spacing.

- **Documentation**
- Removed redundant Storybook addon to streamline developer experience.

- **Style**
- Adjusted CSS for various components to align with updated design
system standards.

- **Tests**
- Updated widget property pane configuration tests for better coverage
and reliability.

- **Chores**
- Cleaned up unused imports and methods across multiple widget
components for improved code maintenance.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-24 11:02:42 +03:00
Ashok Kumar M
6b2c79f48e
feat: Space redistribution UX upgrade and implicit space distribution (#30242) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description

In this PR, we are implementing two features
- When space distribution is happening via the implicit/explicit method,
distribution handle is attracted to the nearest node once mouse pointer
is near to it.


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/a83e4adf-2e1b-413a-9a59-331707c3aa7a


- Implicit space distribution, space distribution can also be done via
section/zone property pane.


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/4123d7dd-659e-483b-91f3-d454e7e0a31d



#### 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 `Section Splitter Control` for enhanced space
distribution within property pane sections.
- Added a `Zone Stepper Control` to manage zone counts through a
user-friendly interface.

- **Enhancements**
  - Improved feature flag logic for more consistent user experience.
- Refined space distribution with new constants and utility functions
for Anvil layout system.
- Streamlined Anvil editor widget structure for better performance and
simplicity.

- **User Interface**
- Implemented new property pane sections for `SectionWidget` and
`ZoneWidget` to improve user interaction and configuration options.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed feature flag retrieval behavior to ensure correct feature
access.

- **Refactor**
- Optimized selectors and hooks for better maintainability and
readability.
- Updated import paths and renamed modules for clearer codebase
navigation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-24 07:56:23 +05:30
Pawan Kumar
302ecb6a1c
feat: Tabler Icons (#30248) 
Fixes #28443
Fixes #27866 

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

- **New Features**
- Introduced `IconSelectControlV2` for enhanced icon selection with
keyboard navigation and state updates.
- Added new `iconStyle` theme property for users to define icon styles
globally.
- Implemented dynamic icon loading with fallback options, improving icon
management.

- **Enhancements**
- Simplified icon usage across various components like `Button`,
`IconButton`, `Menu`, `ModalHeader`, `TextInput`, and more by directly
using icon names.
- Enhanced `Tag` component to use a generic `Icon` component for the
remove action.
  
- **Style Updates**
- Added CSS classes for resizing, boundary display, and pointer event
handling.
  - Updated icon size definitions using CSS custom properties.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed icon-related issues in `Button`, `ActionGroup`, `Menu`, and
`TextInput` components to ensure proper icon display.

- **Documentation**
- Updated storybook and test cases to reflect new icon selection and
usage.

- **Refactor**
- Refactored theme and token management to include `iconStyle` for
consistent icon theming.
- Refined the `ButtonGroupWidget` and `MenuButtonWidget` to use the new
icon selection mechanism.

- **Chores**
- Cleaned up unused icon imports and components across the codebase to
streamline the icon system.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-19 11:54:44 +03:00
Jacques Ikot
f52e4781c1
feat: update canvas building blocks (#30311) 
## Description
**Goal**
1. To remove the dashboard canvas starter building block and replace it
with the Sort and Filter Table building block from the templates
gallery.
2. To replace all canvas starter icons with the corresponding building
blocks icons.

**Steps**
- Add a new page to the Starter Templates app called Sort and Filter
Table
- Export the existing Sort and Filter Template and import into the new
page in Starter Templates using PIE
- Change the copy for title and description in the code
- Take a screenshot of the Sort and Filter table home page, upload to
Contentful and update the screenshot URL.
- Download and add new Icons for all 3 canvas starter blocks
- Deploy updated Starter Templates application and upload new JSON to S3
under the same name

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30261 

#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- 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
- [ ] 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**
- Updated the naming and descriptions of template page layouts for
improved clarity.
- Reorganized and renamed SVG icons for consistency across the platform.

- **Style**
- Enhanced the styling of template layout titles and descriptions for
better readability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-17 20:18:57 +05:30
Rahul Barwal
1b9f3af763
chore: Adds new test file for onboarding start from scratch userflow (#30385) 
## Description
This pull request adds a new test file for the onboarding start from
scratch userflow.
* It also includes an assertion for building block cards on the canvas. 
* Additionally, it includes changes to the templates and dataSources
files to support the test.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30384

#### 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**
	- Enhanced the onboarding flow with additional steps and verifications.
- Introduced new UI selectors for improved interaction with templates
and data sources.

- **Tests**
- Updated end-to-end tests to reflect the new onboarding process and
data source connection prompts.
- Improved testability of UI components with the addition of
`data-testid` attributes.

- **Refactor**
- Modified test setup to use `beforeEach` hook for better test
isolation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-17 18:39:52 +05:30
Rahul Barwal
1523dc40c5
chore: Add CanvasStarterBuildingBlockSeeMore_spec.ts and update related files (#30262) 
## Description
This pull request adds the file
CanvasStarterBuildingBlockSeeMore_spec.ts and updates the related files.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30021
> 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**
- Enhanced onboarding experience with improved selection visibility for
page entities.
- **Tests**
	- Implemented new test suite for the onboarding flow.
- **Style**
- Updated UI components with `data-testid` attributes for better
testability.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-16 14:38:02 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
a15741f14f
fix: Widget selection context switch adjustments (#30117) 2024-01-12 10:53:47 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
be057ff1d8
feat: Anvil DnD highlight activation upgrade (#29979) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR, we are trying to help users figure out wrapped cells and
also differentiate cell drops vs new cell drops.
we are also enhancing the highlights selection algorithm.
- highlights no longer have dropzones
- closest vertical highlights(cell drops) are triggered whenever the
mouse is deemed to be inside the cell withing a set threshold. Cell is
also highlighted for such highlights
- horizontal highlights(new cell drops) are triggered whenever the mouse
is deemed to be not inside any cell based on set threshold.
- post the above filter the closest highlight to the mouse position is
selected to be shown on the canvas as a highlight. so except for places
like Section padding and Zone padding where there is no Canvas,
highlights will always show up.

Issues observed while working on this PR:
- In safari center highlight seems to not work.
- highlights dont trigger in Section + Zone padding areas(will not be
addressed in this 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**
  - Introduced a new highlight feature for the app's layout components.
- Enhanced search functionality with immediate activation for specific
feature flags.

- **Improvements**
- Improved the visual feedback during drag-and-drop operations with
optimized highlight rendering.
- Streamlined the logic for determining viable drop positions within the
layout system.
- Added conditional styling capabilities based on the application's
state.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Corrected the feature flag behavior to ensure consistent feature
access.

- **Refactor**
- Removed unused constants and properties related to drop zones to
simplify layout calculations.
- Enhanced type safety in selector functions for better maintainability.

- **Style**
- Added a new color constant for highlight effects, improving the visual
experience.

- **Tests**
- Updated tests to reflect changes in layout highlight logic and removal
of drop zones.


<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-11 21:31:38 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
5debbf3a46
fix: Stale Page Flicker Bug on switching pages. (#30206) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are fixing the page flicker issue while switching between
pages.

#### 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**
  - Streamlined the editor canvas interface for enhanced performance.
- Simplified rendering of components by removing unnecessary props and
adjusting corresponding test cases.
- Removed redundant attributes from the `<Canvas>` component for
improved component usage without affecting logic or control flow.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-11 11:13:29 +05:30
Jacques Ikot
86bb65ae73
feat: unit test for starter building block (#30185) 
## Description
Unit test for starter building block

`  <StarterBuildingBlocks />`
    ✓ renders the component correctly
    ✓ handles container hover correctly
    ✓ shows loading screen while importing
    ✓ handles starter block hover correctly


#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #30022 

#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- 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
- [ ] 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**
- Enhanced hover behavior and loading screen display during import for
the `StarterBuildingBlocks` component.
- Improved interaction with `TemplateLayoutFrame` and
`TemplateLayoutContainer` components through additional properties.

- **Tests**
- Updated `StarterBuildingBlocks` component tests to cover new
functionalities.
- Removed a test case for the fork modal in the `BuildingBlock`
component.

- **Refactor**
- Introduced a mock store structure for better unit testing
capabilities.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-10 15:30:39 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
8cb733937c
chore: Refactor Context Switching (#29966) 
## Description

Refactors the Context Switching functionality to make it usable of
different IDE types. It now will set a `FocusStrategy` based on the IDE
type { App, Module, Workflow } and perform the same operations.
Implementation of `FocusStrategy` for other IDE types will be done on
the EE side. It removes all dependence of `pageId` from the core
functionality and relies on the Strategy implementation to define what
states to store and set, and the key used for them.

Also renamed the functionality to `FocusRetention` for more clarity.


#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29961

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

## Testing

#### How Has This Been Tested?

- [ ] 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 functionality for managing focus elements within the
application's integrated development environment (IDE).
- Introduced a focus strategy for handling focus elements in the
application.

- **Refactor**
- Restructured code for focus management configurations and strategies
to improve clarity and efficiency.
- Renamed `ConfigType` enum to `FocusElementConfigType` for better
reflection of its purpose.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Resolved issues with focus state restoration during navigation between
different URLs.

- **Tests**
- Updated test cases to align with the new focus management logic and
IDE type checks.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-08 11:09:47 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
cdf2bc6cef
fix: Anvil widget borders (#29940) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
 - fixed border design to match existing designs in fixed and auto.
 - Added crispness to canvas renders
 - fixed cropping of zone borders.
 - fixed issues with space distribution coz of overflow css

Bug: Zone highlights cropped
<img width="854" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 1 59 20 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/8523870e-a370-44e3-877b-1d0f402617b4">

Fixed: 
<img width="896" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 1 57 09 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/d575d6c1-13bb-414e-97c2-ed2642c0d03e">

Bug: Zone borders cropped
<img width="409" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 00 27 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/9881ef3f-d482-461c-af0e-6e6af2f6ed86">

Fixed: 
<img width="434" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 00 44 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/9b7db171-4746-4349-8194-1ba4cdf67306">

Bug: Borders in Dark mode
<img width="443" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 01 58 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/3a5e4578-0279-408b-9f6b-a59021ad94cb">

Fixed: 
<img width="437" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 01 38 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/d885e7f8-43ea-415d-b1a7-f49a0637d388">

Bug: Space distribution min width animation not happening


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/2c8ea694-5f5f-4d15-a5a1-6ef3d35e795c

Fixed: 


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/1192a2a8-f7d1-42a0-90ca-1ea58072e287

Box shadow looks consistent:
Before:
<img width="784" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 08 25 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/30e7fc46-a541-422c-ba8a-58603c9d43cb">
After:
<img width="838" alt="Screenshot 2023-12-29 at 2 09 32 PM"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/93a98ae0-315a-4564-8f6b-7c3b0d42b5b5">

#### 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 constant to manage widget outline offset.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved visibility and styling of internal components with updated
overflow handling.
- Enhanced widget border styling by using shadow effects for better
visual clarity.
- Ensured consistent class naming in layout components with fail-safe
defaults.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed canvas rendering issues by refining pixel ratio calculations and
adjustments.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-03 10:32:13 +05:30
Rahul Barwal
39ca1c16bd
fix: Add isAirgappedInstance check in Onboarding component (#29860) 
## Description
This pull request adds an isAirgappedInstance check in the Onboarding
component. The check ensures that the component behaves correctly in
airgapped instances.

#### 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**
- Updated drop target component to support airgapped instances,
enhancing functionality in restricted network environments.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2024-01-01 17:33:12 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
582a1f28d3
fix: process onClicks instead of captures to make sure anvil canvas is processed at the last (#29918) 
…s processed at the last

fix: process onClicks instead of captures to make sure anvil canvas is
processed at the last

> 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

- **Refactor**
- Improved user interaction with canvas elements by modifying event
handling.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-29 10:26:39 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
e05313c943
feat: Anvil themeing and Anvil vertical alignment (#29907) 
## Description
This PR adds the features of proper vertical alignment and themeing to
Anvil.
- A separate `Container` component is created for Anvil, that is used as
the layer on top of which the themeing tokens are applied.
- A default `min-height` is set using tokens for all widgets in Anvil. 
- Anvil now stops considering any `min-height` configurations provided
by the widgets. It is the widgets responsibility to take care of their
own heights, and Anvil will accommodate them -- no matter the height.
- Table widget's default height is now set to the min height that was
configured for it earlier.
- `AnvilFlexComponent` now has `overflow:visible` to allow the shadows
for zones and sections to not be cut-off.
- All widgets are aligned center vertically by default. This will apply
if they're smaller than the set `min-height`
- Zones and Sections have elevation styles applied suing the `Container`
component mentioned above.
- Zones and Sections don't have any styling property other than
`Background`, we'll add more as we understand more about the product.
   

> Conditional vertical margin applied to widgets.
> If in a row of widgets (.aligned-widget-row), one of the widgets has a
label ([data-field-label-wrapper]), then
> all widgets (.anvil-widget-wrapper) in the row other than the widget
with the label, will shift down using the
> margin-block-start property. This is to ensure that the widgets are
aligned vertically.
> The value of the margin-block-start property is calculated based on
the spacing tokens used by the labels in input
>     like components
> 

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29073 
Fixes #28591
Fixes #28592 
Fixes #28593


#### Media
![Screenshot 2023-12-28 at 3 55
05 AM](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/103687/30b04bc7-62af-40af-9f4c-50774bec3fdf)


#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress

#### Test Plan

#### Issues raised during DP testing
## 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 conditional vertical margins for widgets to ensure
alignment within rows.
- Added a new `Container` component for thematic elevation styles in
Anvil widgets.
- Implemented elevation style options and semantic background settings
for Section and Zone widgets.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved visual layout and alignment of AnvilFlexComponent with
updated styling properties.
- Added `className` properties to various layout components for enhanced
CSS targeting.

- **Style**
- Updated widget styles to accommodate new background and elevation
features.

- **Refactor**
	- Simplified padding logic in WDSParagraphWidget.
	- Streamlined dimensions calculation in WDSTableWidget.

- **Documentation**
- Renamed sections in property panes to better reflect background
styling options.

- **Chores**
- Added `Elevations` enum to manage elevation values consistently across
components.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-29 08:41:05 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
dbda916f09
fix: undo action and highlight positions on right and bottom edges (#29909) 
## Description

1. Make store updates atomic to ensure that undo operation works as
expected.
2. Add another guard to ensure that entire highlight is always visible,
esp along bottom and right edges of a layout.

#### 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


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

- **Refactor**
  - Improved the layout saving process within the Anvil layout system.
- Enhanced the calculation of highlight positions in the layout editor.

- **Chores**
  - Removed unused `SAVE_ANVIL_LAYOUT` action type and related sagas.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed positioning calculations for layout highlights to ensure
accurate alignment and distribution.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-29 08:11:49 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
4e6c6662cd
fix: Space distribution glitch while hitting minimum widths. (#29901) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
Fixing CSS glitch when space redistribution hits minimum column width of
zones.

#### 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 logic for space distribution in layouts to ensure
smoother transitions when minimum space conditions are met.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-27 20:43:43 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
99c56fe47a
chore: Side by Side foundations (#29894) 
Adds some foundational changes for Side by Side IDE behind a new feature
flag

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

- **New Features**
- Introduced a new IDE editor view mode with full-screen and half-screen
options.
- Added feature flag `release_side_by_side_ide_enabled` for enabling
side-by-side IDE layout.

- **Enhancements**
	- Updated UI to accommodate new editor view modes.
- Introduced `FileTabs` component for better file management within the
IDE.

- **Refactor**
	- Refactored state management for selected IDE tabs and segments.
- Improved Redux action and selector implementations related to IDE
functionalities.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed import statements for consistent and correct usage across
components.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: coderabbitai[bot] <136622811+coderabbitai[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-12-27 17:41:54 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
830ccaa692
feat: Anvil section space redistribution (#29632) 
## Description

Anvil Section Space distribution

In this pr, we are adding a feature to sections to redistribute a
sections space within its zones.
you can find details of it over
[here](https://www.notion.so/Sections-and-Zones-design-WIP-cbcb8b0ab2514aaf90d04aa3309ad56c)

As part of it we have three parts of changes
- UI components
- Middleware(Redux and Sagas)
- Space redistribution algorithm

UI/UX:


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/092ba31f-d2e5-400e-80d7-45878d75ff98

Middleware changes:
- have added a new state in WidgetDragResizeState `anvil` and into it
have added `isDistributingSpace` to capture when space distribution is
active.
- added `anvilSpaceDistributionSagas` to capture all sagas wrt space
redistribution

Space redistribution algorithm:
- Have added algorithm for redistributing space, have noted down details
about it
[here](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Space-distribution-and-responsiveness-questions-517d140e83864c2287765c99dcd7c8da?pvs=4#9b33c84bcea24cfca63d7caef036f896).
>
#### 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**
- Enhanced widget resizing capabilities with space distribution handles
in Anvil layout system.
  - Introduced preview mode support for widget size configuration.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved Anvil layout system with dynamic space distribution during
resizing.
- Added flexibility to widget size configuration by considering preview
mode.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Corrected widget border styles to reflect space distribution and
resizing states.

- **Refactor**
- Streamlined space distribution logic in Anvil layout sagas and
selectors.
- Updated `AnvilFlexComponent` to conditionally assign `flexGrow`
property.

- **Documentation**
- Updated comments to clarify new space distribution behavior in Anvil
layout.

- **Style**
  - Adjusted styles for space distribution handles in section layouts.

- **Chores**
  - Added new action types for Anvil space distribution process.
  - Enhanced Redux state structure for drag and resize operations.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Preet <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com>
 2023-12-27 16:05:41 +05:30
Rahul Barwal
2fef626dcc
feat: adds see more to canvas starter templates (#29777) 
## Description
* This PR increases discovery of building blocks, allowing more building
blocks to be shown in canvas.
* We also refactored the way `add a page from template` functions: now
we have updated store structure to reflect from where the modal open was
triggered.
* This pull request refactors the template styling and adds support for
an optional modal layout. It also includes various updates and fixes to
the styled components used in the templates feature.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29723
> 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

- 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
- [ ] 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 modal for template selection with the ability to hide
it.
	- Added a "See More" text option for template page layouts.
	- Introduced layout switching capability within the templates modal.

- **Enhancements**
	- Updated template list and content components to support modal layout.
	- Added initial filter state management for template filtering.

- **Refactor**
	- Renamed selectors and actions for clarity and consistency.
- Improved logic for determining template forking and filter component
behavior.

- **Bug Fixes**
	- Adjusted styles to correctly apply margins in various layouts.

- **Documentation**
	- Updated messages and constants with more accurate terminology.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-27 10:29:33 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
fa7bd6a543
feat: add layouts and widgets for sections and zones. (#29713) 
## Description

1. Create Section Widget.
2. Create Zone Widget.
3. Create layouts and presets for Sections and zones.
4. Upate layout for Anvil Main Canvas.
5. Refactor BaseLayoutComponent. Separate renderer for edit and view
modes.
6. Add childrenMap context to avoid prop drilling through all layouts.
7. Add Anvil Config for WDS widgets.

#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

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

#### Test Plan

## 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 a new `Zone Stepper Control` component for UI interaction.
- Added `AnvilCanvas` and `AnvilMainCanvas` components with improved
performance and interaction features.
- Implemented `LayoutProvider` and `useClickToClearSelections` for
better layout management.
- Launched `AnvilCanvasDraggingArena` and `AnvilHighlightingCanvas`
components with enhanced drag-and-drop capabilities.
- New `useZoneMinWidth` hook to calculate minimum zone width based on
child widgets.
- Added `SectionRow`, `Section`, `ZoneColumn`, and `Zone` components for
advanced layout structuring.
  - New `WidgetRenderer` component for dynamic child widget rendering.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved canvas activation and deactivation logic with
`useCanvasActivation` and `useCanvasActivationStates`.
- Enhanced drag-and-drop experience with updated `useCanvasDragging`
logic.
- Streamlined `AnvilMainCanvas` integration with conditional rendering
based on `renderMode`.
- Optimized `FlexLayout` component to handle new `isContainer` and
`layoutType` properties.

- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed issues with widget positioning and event handling in
`WidgetNamesCanvas` components.
- Corrected `PageView` width property type for consistent page
rendering.

- **Refactor**
- Consolidated Anvil layout update management with `anvilSagas` and
`anvilChecksSagas`.
- Refined `SectionWidget` and `ZoneWidget` configuration for improved
stability and performance.
- Streamlined `LayoutElementPositionsObserver` with `layoutType`
enhancements.

- **Documentation**
- Updated comments and added clarifications for better developer
understanding of canvas-related hooks and components.

- **Style**
- Modified `.anvil-canvas` class styles for full-width and height
presentation.

- **Chores**
- Cleaned up import statements and removed unused code across various
components and utilities.

- **Tests**
- Enhanced Cypress tests with additional selectors and interaction
commands for `AutoDimension` feature verification.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-12-26 09:16:58 -05:00
Valera Melnikov
ad256ed64a
feat: add readonly mode to input (#29778) 
## Description
Add readonly mode for input component and widgets

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29145 

#### Media


https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/2d42a2bf-603b-4b30-a74c-6c1edd408216

![Снимок экрана 2023-12-20 в 20 13
43](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/bbb45fee-65ae-4f0b-8681-33713bee079f)

#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- 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

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

- **New Features**
- Introduced a "Read-only" mode for input fields, enabling users to view
data without the ability to modify it.

- **Enhancements**
- Improved input components to respect both disabled and read-only
states.
  - Updated widget properties to include read-only configurations.

- **Style Updates**
- Standardized padding across various components to use spacing
variables for consistency.

- **Documentation**
- Added "Read-only" property documentation to relevant component
interfaces and configurations.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-21 15:03:28 +03:00
Jacques Ikot
93b24a145a
fix: update event name for template fork from canvas starter templates (#29622) 
## Description
There was a typo in the event name for fork_APPLICATIONTEMPLATE. The
even has been named correctly.

#### 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

- **Bug Fixes**
- Corrected a typo in the analytics event name for forking application
templates.

<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
 2023-12-14 17:17:53 +05:30
Jacques Ikot
71aa596160
fix: update event type and trigger for FORK_APPLICATIONTEMPLATE (#29250) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
> Update FORK_APPLICATIONTEMPLATE to fork_APPLICATIONTEMPLATE to fix
duplicate on mixpanel.
>
> 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 #29186 
> 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
 2023-12-01 11:12:07 +05:30
Ankita Kinger
80a3f57519
chore: Refactoring sidebar on app editor to support the same on package editor (#29212) 
## Description

Refactoring sidebar on app editor to support the same on package editor

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [#28476](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/28476)

#### 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
- [ ] 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: Hetu Nandu <hetunandu@gmail.com>
 2023-11-30 14:56:24 +05:30
Hetu Nandu
ca1713c73e
fix: Improvements to Sidebar for navigation (#29205) 
## Description

- Rename to Pages to Editor in the Sidebar
- Move Editor to top
- Update "Home" to "All apps"

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #29206

#### 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
 2023-11-30 06:11:59 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
666493fab9
fix: View mode dimension observer (#29071) 
## Description
- The dimension observer in auto layout was not triggering in the viewer
due to the fact that the observed container did not adapt to the child
contents.
- This worked in the editor because the document was not in the default
`position:auto` flow.

- The fix was to change the `position` property to `auto` and make sure
that the observed container has the height which `fit-content`.

Reference:
https://www.joshwcomeau.com/css/understanding-layout-algorithms/

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28556

#### Media
#### 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
- [NA] 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:
- [ ] [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>
 2023-11-28 19:58:58 +05:30
Pawan Kumar
c1884fa25c
chore: Integrate Radio Group (#29026) 
Fixes #29001
 2023-11-23 11:21:23 +03:00
Ashok Kumar M
d727ecf7c5
chore: register offset values as per parent drop target in Anvil (#28757) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are making changes to layout elements position observer to
capture offset values of drag parents(layouts that can have widgets)
relative to their own immediate dragparents.

Why?
once we have these offset values of each droptarget wrt to main canvas
droptarget we can clearly detect offsetvalues of widgets, since each
widget's positions that are captured already are wrt to main canvas,
with the calculated offset from the above process we can calculated
widget positions relative to their immediate parent as well.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28561
Fixes #28585
> 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
 2023-11-15 18:02:12 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
a6e0c54d72
fix: Anvil fixes and enhancements post R0 (#28711) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are fixing
- suggested widgets feature in Anvil
- implementing isVisible prop based rendering in Anvil
- remove main canvas resizer in edit mode of Anvil
- cleaning up sniping mode based changes for anvil since its only used
via sign posting flow which is a fixed layout only feature right now.
- adding buffer for main canvas DnD
- fixing glitches in first time DnD
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28577

> 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
 2023-11-15 18:01:54 +05:30
Jacques Ikot
c16cdaa780
feat: add events for hover on building block and datasource connect click (#28851) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
> Add two new events to track the new building blocks. When user hovers
over building block (STARTER_BUILDING_BLOCK_HOVER) and user clicks on
connect datasource prompt (STARTER_BUILDING_BLOCK_CONNECT_DATA_CLICK)
>
> 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 #28780 
>
>
#### 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
 2023-11-15 06:45:24 +05:30
albinAppsmith
d7a061935f
fix: IDE texts and alignements bugs (#28783) 
## Description

This PR fixes,
1. ‘Drag and drop a widget’ not required to show when settings pane is
open.
2. Overlap of the libraries popover is seen over the left pane
3. Data Pane : Change the text workplace to workspace.


#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/28782

#### 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
- [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
 2023-11-13 11:16:20 +05:30
Rudraprasad Das
b061ce1f4b
fix: git branch protection fixes (#28667) 
## Description
- Adds license flag for branch protection
- Disables omni-bar and keyboard shortcuts for protected branches
- Adds navigation for multiple pages
- Hides preview on protected views
- Adds feature flag for Git Connection Success

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28056 

#### Media
<img width="1728" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/8724051/ddbad4d8-9852-439f-b46d-fd5d58dd883b">

#### 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
- [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
 2023-11-07 20:25:02 +05:30
Rudraprasad Das
cda27eb6f3
feat: branch protection (#28526) 
## Description
- Adds server endpoints for getting and setting protected branches
- Adds protected canvas view for branch protection
- Adds default branch and protected branch in git modal settings

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28434, #28056

#### Media
Protected View -
<img width="1728" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/8724051/4fb26450-61e1-4fc0-a66d-0ebaa28ff90c">

Branch Protection Settings -
<img width="1728" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/8724051/fb6d16b6-0a3c-42fd-be1a-9b3677048663">


#### 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
- [ ] 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Nayan <nayan@appsmith.com>
 2023-11-03 22:43:36 +05:30
Rahul Barwal
95784c6d10
feat: replace blank canvas with starter templates. (#28284) 
## Description
### Shows starter page templates instead of blank canvas
As part of first activation experiment, this PR implements changes for
showing starter page templates and allows user to fork a starter page
template when they click on any template.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27884
#### 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
- 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
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed

---------

Co-authored-by: Jacques Ikot <jacquesikot@gmail.com>
 2023-10-30 11:15:05 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
5cb06ee6e5
fix: Hacky fixes to make table work in Anvil Safari (#28417) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are making few hacky changes to WDS Table widget to make
it work in safari as well as function as expected in all browsers.
Table widget current version is a copied version of Fixed layout so it
expects dimensions to be set unlike other WDS widgets so adding
dimensions in a hacky way.
In safari simple bar css doesnt see to work well, they overflow and
cover all other widgets. @jsartisan and I tried to understand the issue,
but for now making the wrapper position: sticky for some reason works.
so adding that as well.

All these fixes are hacky so that we get a usable Anvil Edito, but they
are safe coz WDS widgets are not used anywhere except Anvil and Anvil is
under a feature flag.

#### 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
 2023-10-27 14:33:42 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
e9c3034c1c
chore: add mousemove listener to konva and bug fixes. (#28381) 
## Description

Add ``mousemove`` event listener to WidgetName canvas. This allows the
canvas to toggle its own pointerEvents back to ``none`` when the mouse
is not hovering over a widget name component.

Additionally:
1. Removes highlights for empty ``AlignedWidgetRow``.
2. Fix layout preset for container widget. New layoutIDs are generated
for every instance.
3. Add an action to remove unobserved elements from layout positions
redux store.
4. Bottom padding of MainCanvas layout.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28380 
Fixes #28415 


#### 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.
- [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
- [ ] 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
 2023-10-27 11:54:26 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
b1933e347f
fix: Fixing Anvil DnD for nested containers (#28362) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this pr, 
- we are making sure layouts inside dragged widgets are not activated
- we are making sure layoutId is newly generated when a widget with a
canvas is added instead of using the defaults layoutId coz its a frozen
object which was using same set of layoutIds for every time we add
widgets.
This fix works only for one level on the canvas widgets, bringing this
to your notice @prsidhu

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28337
> 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
 2023-10-26 11:54:24 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
7b125741c7
fix: Anvil Editor issues with Resizer in safari (#28361) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this pr we are fixing 
- Unwanted text selection during DnD and canvas resizing in Safari
- In Anvil Shift + Click will still work like Ctrl + Click to pick and
select widgets instead of pick all widgets in between a node on Entity
Explorer like in Fixed Layout.
- We are also fixing canvas resizer being stuck in resizing mode when
mouse right is clicked.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28193
> 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
 2023-10-26 10:07:06 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
492eece3c9
fix: widget dimensions for anvil widgets (#28356) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
In this PR we are supplying width and height by computing rows and
columns defaults provided for fixed layout.
This is temporary, The actual implementation would be that widgets would
compute their own dimensions.
#### 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
 2023-10-26 09:50:28 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
79823158e2
chore: update highlight logic to disregard empty layouts. (#28339) 
## Description

1. Update drop zone calculation logic for highlights.
2. Discard highlights from empty non drop target layouts.
3. Use single ``rowGap`` value.
4. Fix multi delete issue, where ghost highlights are visible after
deleting all widgets at once.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28325 
Fixes #28342 

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

#### 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


## 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
- [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
 2023-10-25 11:16:32 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
3d42333539
fix: Fix widget name canvas issues (#28314) 
## Description
Fixes the following from #28310
- Use LayoutSystemType or LayoutSystemFeatures instead of feature flags
in
[app/client/src/pages/Editor/CanvasPropertyPane/index.tsx](e7603fd213 (diff-6ffc62fd8fff7633da84c1bbf822394ff49f1d89dc4ad073fff16e2f5e5d41fd))
- In WidgetNamesCanvas use SetDragginStateFnType or
SetDraggingStateActionPayload and remove the other from the codebase.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28312
Fixes #28310

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

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [x] Jest
- [ ] 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
 2023-10-25 11:10:43 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
742e773805
fix: Move widget name overlay to WidgetsEditor (#28306) 
## Description
- The first widget name in anvil was being cut-off due to the fact that
the DOM grandparent of the widget name overlay canvas was not allowing
children to be visible beyond bounds.
- In this PR, the widget name overlay canvas renders in the
WidgetsEditor (earlier grandparent now parent) instead of
MainContainerWrapper (earlier parent now sibling)
- Also, this PR removes the dependency on refs by the widget name
overlay canvas

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28304

#### 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
- [ ] 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
 2023-10-24 20:10:17 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
159a26fb6e
chore: Add MutuationObserver to track changes in positions of widgets and layouts. (#28315) 2023-10-24 07:37:06 -04:00
Ashok Kumar M
6355e7a697
fix: Check for parent widget existence to render drop target (#28275) 
## Description
In the legacy architecture, List Widget meta first item was rendering in
edit mode allowing DnD, resize, etc while the rest of the items were
rendering in view mode restricting any editing experience.
The first item was being used as a template to decide what the template
was going to be for rest of the items.
However after the overhaul of BaseWidget and CanvasWidget render mode is
always EDIT or VIEW for all widgets so DropTarget had to render a meta
canvas widget which it was not written to handle. so have added checks
to make sure DropTarget does not render and wrap widgets that do not
have a parent.

Ideally this should have been caught in the CI, there are tests already
but the checks were happening to check if List widget was allowed inside
another List widget but the other items that were rendering in view mode
were not being asserted.
I have added tests to check if all nested widgets are properly rendered
and there is no "Oops, something went wrong" error. This should make
sure this issue does not get past CI in the future.
 2023-10-23 16:41:40 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
49c222c4a5
fix: Restructure WidgetNameCanvas (#28202) 
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #28201

#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - doesn't
effect user perception
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
#### Test Plan

#### Issues raised during DP testing

## 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
 2023-10-20 11:45:16 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
41ee6473a8
chore: fix minor issues on anvil (#28240) 
## Description

1. Supply additional classes / styles for MainCanvas through its
parents.



#### 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


## 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
- [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed

---------

Co-authored-by: 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: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-10-19 23:00:46 -04:00
Preet Sidhu
69f4a412bf
chore: add highlight calculation logic for layouts. (#27980) 
## Description

1. Add LayoutComponent functionality.
2. Create Basic LayoutComponents.
3. Create LayoutPresets needed for Container-like widgets.
4. Add highlight calculation logic for all basic Layout Components.
5. Create dragging sagas for Anvil.
6. Create DraggingArena associated functionality to handle DnD in Anvil.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27004 


#### Type of change
> Please delete options that are not relevant.
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

## Testing

#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [x] 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
- [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
- [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-10-19 16:27:40 -04:00
Abhinav Jha
4fa35210a8
chore: Update DSL for Anvil (#27966) 
## Description
- If the Anvil feature flag is enabled, set the layout system type to
"ANVIL" when creating an application
- Refactor DSL transformers to pull the specific transformer based on
the layout system type
- Refactor code to move layout system specific transformers to the
specific layout system type folders
- Add new entry in the list of feature flags for Anvil

Note: No changes are observed visually in the application, as we're
defaulting to the Fixed layout system's widget flow until integrations
for Anvil are complete.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27007 
Fixes #26971 

#### Media
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit - NA
- [ ] Jest - PENDING
- [ ] Cypress - NA

#### Test Plan
#### Issues raised during DP testing
## 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
 2023-10-19 20:50:17 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
7da8561339
fix: Misc. fixes for anvil (#28204) 
## Description
Fixes #28203 
- Borders are added to widgets separately now, as there is no resizer in
Anvil
- Fix main container jump when hovering over the main container resizer
- Add height 100% to themeprovider so that the layout preset for main
canvas can render correctly
- Stop widgets from focusing in preview mode
- Prevent AutoHeight Sagas from running in Anvil
- Prevent Auto Layout sagas from running in Anvil
 2023-10-19 20:44:10 +05:30
Abhinav Jha
fce5524aa8
chore: Add observer to LayoutElements (#27993) 
## Description
- Create a hook based on the `LayoutElementPositionsObserver` and use it
in `AnvilFlexComponent` such that all widgets in Anvil have their
positions registered in the `LayoutElementPositionsReducer`
- Do the same for `layouts` in Anvil. Added in the `FlexLayout`
component.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #26947 
Fixes #27287 

#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
 2023-10-18 19:09:07 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
9eac55a380
chore: add consistent-type-definitions rule (#27907) 
## Description
Add consistent-type-definitions rule
 2023-10-11 10:35:24 +03:00
Valera Melnikov
f5a0e41f60
chore: update eslint and dependencies then fix revealed errors (#27908) 
## Description
Update eslint and dependencies then fix revealed errors
 2023-10-11 10:14:38 +03:00
Apeksha Bhosale
0f393a2423
chore: separated tree type into common file to be extended on EE (#27812) 
## Description
UnEvalTree, dataTree and configTree's entities needs to be extended on
EE to accommodate module inputs and different types of modules hence the
separation.
I have added few more sanity checks in the existing code which were
throwing errors/warning on EE.

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

#### 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?
> 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
 2023-10-10 18:02:17 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
fb12f6ad87
chore:add eslint rules (#27878) 
Add eslint rules
- promise-function-async
- prefer-nullish-coalescing
 2023-10-09 16:54:06 +03:00
rahulramesha
8a35e05923
chore: code changes for widget position observer and widget name on canvas (#27367) 
## Description
The PR contains non integrated code changes for below new features, The
changes are not integrated to work but only contains the ground work
code changes that can be added to css based layout/ Anvil once that is
available in Release.

- **Widget Position observer-** Since we are moving to css based layout,
the positions of widgets will be unknown. To solve the issue we have
introduced the above feature that stores/updates position of widgets on
Redux state whenever a widget position updates. without manually
triggering any action
- **Widget Name on Canvas-** For the New Layout the existing widget name
is inconsistent as it would cut off or visually not visible. to solve
that the widget name will now be drawn on html canvas than it being a
dom node component

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #26945 
Fixes #26948 


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


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

#### 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Abhinav Jha <abhinav@appsmith.com>
 2023-10-06 15:37:43 +05:30
Valera Melnikov
e57e075d99
chore: replace emotion/sheet to emotion/css (#27827) 
## Description
Replace emotion/sheet to emotion/css. 

**Motivation**
During performance testing, it was revealed that creating a separate
class for each component is slow.

Rendering 10k elements
<img width="269" alt="Снимок экрана 2023-10-05 в 13 34 12"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/a881b188-b7d6-4fff-bc79-e7a81e37ffac">

As part of the task, an approach using styles through attributes was
also tested, it works well, but we still need to create a separate class
in runtime if we work with container queries. Because of this, I think
it's best to use a ready-made solution from emotion/css, since it
creates only one class out of the box for elements with the same styles,
which allows to render elements with good performance.

Rendering 80k elements
![Снимок экрана 2023-10-05 в 13 28
33](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/11555074/510302f9-d45b-4b01-a59d-538d2f5d356e)

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27750 

#### 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

## 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
 2023-10-06 09:59:02 +03:00
Preet Sidhu
bae38d1566
[Task]: add vertical alignment to widget configuration (#27700) 
## Description

- Add vertical alignment values to widget configurations.
- Include ```stretch``` vertical alignment.

Fixes #27052


#### 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

## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-10-05 08:57:39 -04:00
Ashok Kumar M
703048b7b5
chore: Layout system wise restructuring of Canvas Widget (#27496) 
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description

In This PR, we are cleaning up Canvas Widget implementation and taking
measures to remove it from the widget suite.
more detailed explanation of Why and How of the solution
[here](https://www.notion.so/Canvas-Widget-73776a3364ba42eb8f783c79046777d0)

In this solution we are going to remove implementation of Editing and
Layouting Specific implementation from Canvas Widget and create a new
view component which is Layout system specific.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27003
#### 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
- [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
- [ ] 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
 2023-10-04 17:23:29 +05:30
Nilansh Bansal
9be87c2cc2
feat: added anvil type for app layout (#27633) 
## Description
This PR adds a new type ANVIL in the acceptable app layout types.
In this PR, 
BE changes: 
- Anvil type is added to appPositioiningType enum.

FE changes:
- rename appPositioningType to layoutSystemType internally in all places
except the reducer and application payload.
- move certain layout system specific files into layout system folder

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #26973 

#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)

## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [x] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [x] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-10-04 14:24:16 +05:30
Preet Sidhu
46dcf3a8f0
chore: Create layout system structure for Anvil and AnvilFlexComponent. (#27178) 
## Description
1. Add new ```appPositioningType``` : ANVIL.
2. Create new code path and folder structure for Anvil layout system.
3. Move common pieces of functionalities between autoLayout and anvil to
anvil folder structure (e.g. ```CanvasResizer```).
4. Create ```AnvilFlexComponent```.
5. Use WDS Flex component in AnvilFlexComponent.
6. Pass min max size props in a data structure that is supported by
container queries in the Flex component.
    e.g. min-width: { base: "120px", "480px": "200px" }
7. Supply the following flex properties (flex-grow flex-shrink
flex-basis) to widgets depending on their ```responsiveBehvaiour```:
    a) Fill: ```flex: 1 1 0%;```
    b) Hug: ```flex: 0 0 auto;```

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
1. [#26987](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26987)
2. [#26609](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26609)
3. [#26611](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/26611)

#### 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
- [x] 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
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-10-02 15:41:05 -04:00
Aswath K
3170af84c9
chore: Remove position props from List and Table widgets (#27018) 
- Replaced the property `templateBottomRow` with `templateHeight` as a
first step to remove the dependency of fixed layout specific position
property from List widget.
- Remove appPositioningType and isMobile props from widget DataTree.
- Include width and height as `componentHeight` and `componentWidth` in
widget DataTree.
- Update ListWidget, ListWidgetV2, TableWidget and TableWidgetV2 to use
the componentHeight prop in derivedProps calculation to get pageSize.
 2023-09-19 10:52:11 +05:30
Aswath K
f2c3b971a4
chore: Removed wrappedChildren in FlexComponent (#27240) 
`wrappedChildren` is used to add a `div` around widget which sets 100%
height and width. This happens only on deploy mode. This was added to
make sure some widgets are getting properly displayed in deploy mode.
In this PR, we are removing it and make the necessary changes in the
widget's code itself.
 2023-09-14 15:22:58 +05:30
Aswath K
fb4149e0e0
chore: Remove position props from widgets (#26781) 2023-09-13 19:27:42 +05:30
rahulramesha
0fd3345163
chore: Rename and cleanup of editor components (#26944) 
## Description
This PR is aimed at Renaming and cleanup of editor components. The
changes include,
- Rename Editor components to reflect more of it's function as an editor
component
- Rename all references of the container to wrapper so as to avoid
confusion with Actual containers and canvases
- Pass down few instances of selected properties to children instead of
reselecting the same in the children
- Remove all instances of `isAutolayout`, instead use
`useLayoutSystemFeatures` to check if the particular feature is enabled
in the particular layout type.

P.S. please feel free to suggest better names that define the function
of the components.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #26571

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

#### 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

---------

Co-authored-by: Ashok Kumar M <35134347+marks0351@users.noreply.github.com>
 2023-09-12 19:44:02 +05:30
Apeksha Bhosale
01c90f1df1
changes in evaluation for EE - split (#27144) 
## Description
Evaluation split changes for EE. 
1. RequiresLinting function has moved to common place - on EE extra
checks will be added
2. DataTreeFactory - getActionsForCurrentPage changed to
getCurrentActions -- which will be modified on EE to acomodate package
actions
3. same as above for getJSCollectionsForCurrentPage --> changed to
getCurrentJSCollections

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
> if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers
about this first
>
>

>
#### 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
- [ ] 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
 2023-09-12 17:21:39 +05:30
Ashok Kumar M
0cbec4283c
chore: BaseWidget Restructuring (#26562) 
## Description

Create a Basewidget wrapper that supplies Widget Onion as per the layout
system.

involves extracting widget layers presently in the BaseWidget into HOCs
and hooks and make sure layout systems can be scaled.
Make sure Modal widget is handled as a overlay widget whose wrappers are
supplied by basewidget instead of modal widget implementing its own
editing blocks.
This PR also separates the drag n drop logic for both auto layout and
fixed layout. They are moved into respective Layout system folders to
have clear sepsration of concern

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #26674
Fixes #26675
Fixes #26676
Fixes #26570
Fixes #26590 
Fixes #26591 
Fixes #26592 
<img width="931" alt="BaseWidgetHOC"
src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/22f4cf1e-e4c5-4475-83a8-6818e7cebe70">

[Miro Link to view the new
system](https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVM6vRgf8=/?moveToWidget=3458764560239189204&cot=14)


> 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.
- 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)
>
>
>
## 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

---------

Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <rahul@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: rahulramesha <71900764+rahulramesha@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Preet Sidhu <preetsidhu.bits@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Aswath K <aswath.sana@gmail.com>
 2023-09-11 21:25:11 +05:30