Fixes#31289
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Ensured certain experimental features ("ab_wds_enabled" and
"release_anvil_enabled") are always enabled for testing purposes.
- **Refactor**
- Improved the reliability of widget configuration updates by ensuring
modifications are made on a cloned object, preserving the original data
integrity.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local>
> 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 how widgets are moved inside zones.
previous changes missed to cater to basic small widget movement within a
zone.
Now when widgets move inside a zone.
- for small widgets, we look for layout based on highlight info and add
widgets to it.
- for large widgets, we create a new layout next to the layout mentioned
in the highlight info and add widgets to it like adding new widgets
Same logic propagets to copy paste based widget addition as well.
Additional fixes:
- Widgets were being moved in the order of selection, now we use
position data to sort them and place based on position data.
- Widgets were not allowed to click and deselect(mostly used while
trying to multi select via cmd + click)
#### 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
## Description
Changelog
- Removed create module options from workflows queries inside apps
- Added error handling for undefined js actions
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31048
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
> Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also
list any relevant details for your test configuration.
> Delete anything that is not relevant
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
- [ ] Jest
- [ ] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag
#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **New Features**
- Enhanced the action entity component to include `pluginType`, enabling
conditional rendering of menu options based on the plugin type.
- **Bug Fixes**
- Fixed an issue in the JavaScript action utility to safely iterate over
variables, preventing errors when the variable list is uninitialized.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
> Code split and refactor to support action execution without
permissions
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes [[Task]: Permission less way of executing a workflow trigger query
securely](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30231)
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception)
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
Manually tested the execution of an Action (with and without datasource)
by a curl command on a user who is in no way associated to the
workspace.
- [x] JUnit
Existing unit tests should pass.
#### 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
- **New Features**
- Introduced a feature to optionally bypass permission checks in
specific scenarios, enhancing flexibility in operations.
- **Refactor**
- Updated method signatures across several classes to support
conditional permission checks.
- **Tests**
- Added new tests to validate the behavior of permission retrieval with
the bypass option.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com>
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Style**
- Improved styling isolation for text input elements to enhance visual
consistency.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local>
Closes#31284
1. Decreased overall chroma everywhere except for actual `bgAccent`.
2. Couldn't reproduce the too-light heading text issue in Storybook,
`fg*` colors are all appropriately dark. Perhaps, a wrong token is
applied in the editor?
Before / After comparisons for warm and cold seeds:
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai
-->
## Summary by CodeRabbit
## Summary by CodeRabbit
- **Style**
- Enhanced contrast in both dark and light mode themes through
adjustments in chroma and lightness values.
- Improved color accuracy in the design system themes for better
representation.
- Updated color values in test scenarios for more precise RGB
representation.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
> Pull Request Template
>
> Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request.
Delete all quotes before creating the pull request.
>
## Description
This PR addresses two particular things with space distribution
- Issue: Space distribution distributing more than max column limit
space
- Enhancement: Replace flew grow css for zones to flex basis to make
sure column widths are even irresepective of number of zones in a
section.
Additional Fixes:
- replaced test id of widgets editor to abide by repo standards.
- disable crud app generation feature for Anvil.
#### 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 new feature flags to enhance application capabilities.
- Introduced dynamic space redistribution for improved layout
management.
- Added "Generate App" functionality for users with specific feature
access.
- **Enhancements**
- Updated UI selectors for better consistency and reliability.
- Refined layout system logic to always utilize the Anvil layout system.
- **Refactor**
- Optimized feature flag selection logic for efficiency.
- Improved flex property handling in layout components for more accurate
space distribution.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
## Description
The primary aim of this feature is to empower users by enabling them to
seamlessly integrate building blocks along with their associated
components (queries, JavaScript, datasources, and widgets) into their
existing applications through drag-and-drop functionality.
This PR adds change to create a Partial IE engine to download the json
file from CS, then add all DS, JS, Queries and Custom JS Libs. Also
handle the name refactoring in js, queries and dsl and then return
modified widget dsl to frontend.
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes#31315
#### Media
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [ ] Manual
- [ ] JUnit
#### Test Plan
https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Test-planning-Drag-and-drop-building-blocks-030b0a5e944a478c9598ad65ba5096e2?pm=c
#### 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 `BuildingBlockDTO` import.
- Added `ApplicationTemplateService` and `WidgetRefactorUtil` services.
- Added `importBuildingBlock` method.
- Introduced partial import functionality for building blocks.
- Added capability to refactor widget and action names during import to
avoid name clashes.
- **Enhancements**
- Improved logic for importing resources within a page.
- Enhanced name refactoring in DSL bindings to ensure consistency across
the application.
- **Refactor**
- Updated methods to handle new import structures and services more
efficiently.
- **Tests**
- Added new tests to verify partial imports and name refactoring
functionalities.
<!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
1. This is unused.
2. Such perma-caching is better owned by the repository, whose data is
being cached. For example, `UserRepository*` in case of
`getAnonymousUser`. Having all cached resources in one place doesn't
scale. Besides, doing it this way means we have do hit the DB directly
with `mongoOperations`, because injecting any repository beans will
cause cyclic injections.
