Protei/PromucFlow_constructor
2
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions 4 Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity
15,555 Commits 1 Branch 0 Tags 507 MiB
a958a3823f
Commit Graph

7 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Valera Melnikov
9eac55a380
chore: add consistent-type-definitions rule (#27907) 
## Description
Add consistent-type-definitions rule
 2023-10-11 10:35:24 +03:00
arunvjn
bb26d025a4
fix: remove slash commands from API url field (#27432) 
## Description
#27070 accidentally introduced slash commands in API URL field. This
could lead to a bad UX since `/` is predominant in URLs. This PR removes
slash commands from the URL field.

#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes #27425 
>
#### Media
> A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it
looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video
>
>
#### Type of change
- Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
>
>
## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] 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
 2023-09-19 17:17:49 +05:30
srix
d34edec1f4
feat: assistive binding (#27070) 
> Pull Request Template

## Description
An assistive Binding feature is added. A new code editor hinter menu
will pop up once three characters is pressed, and they match with any
entities. This assistance is expected to help many new app builders
discover binding features.

PRD: [Widget binding &
success](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Widget-binding-success-bc2f559b67194891992c6163eb8ac457)
UI Design :
[Zeplin](https://app.zeplin.io/project/64df0f50e3f9570e8dcfc803/screen/64df0fa0e771af22508f2267)
POC: [POC for Binding Success -
Engineering](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/POC-for-Binding-Success-Engineering-07157e8e90c7451a850d6d054d975f36)
ERD : [Engineering Requirement - Assistive
Binding](https://www.notion.so/appsmith/Engineering-Requirement-Assistive-Binding-b04e41f07e3b4c998be7b8b49f8324ba)


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

When a users input within a property of a widget matches any
query/api/jsobject of their application, a dropdown menu will appear
with possible binding options for users to select from. #26682

When the user adds a new binding from the menu the cursor should be
present in between the moustache bindings #26683

When a user toggles JS mode for the input, bindings with the cursor in
between them should be present by default (incase input has no value)
#26685

#### Media

#### 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
- [x] Cypress
>
>
#### Test Plan
https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2507
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)

- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1710094372
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711189712
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711209028
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711214677
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711311082
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711321208
- [x]
https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/27070#issuecomment-1711336112

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


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

---------

Co-authored-by: arunvjn <arun@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Favour Ohans <fohanekwu@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
 2023-09-15 21:23:51 +05:30
arunvjn
4661f7ab0c
chore: code splitting changes for Appsmith AI (#23188) 
## Description
- Changes to codeEditor/index.ts to support AI integration.
- Added AIAssisted prop to code editor component.
- Added AIWindow interface to support AI popover in business edition.

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

## Testing
>
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [x] Manual
>
>
#### Test Plan
> Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR
>
>
#### Issues raised during DP testing
> Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking
(copy link from comments dropped on this PR)
>
>
>
## Checklist:
#### Dev activity
- [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project
- [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] My changes generate no new warnings
- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag


#### QA activity:
- [ ] [Speedbreak
features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change)
have been covered
- [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of
interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest)
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other
QA members
- [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP
- [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA
Round 2
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed
- [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed
 2023-05-15 15:09:18 +05:30
Satish Gandham
83538ad74d
feat: Bundle optimization and first load improvements (#21667) 
Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <mail@iamakulov.com>
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com>
Co-authored-by: Ivan Akulov <iamakulov@outlook.com>
Co-authored-by: Aishwarya UR <aishwarya@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: Shrikant Sharat Kandula <shrikant@appsmith.com>
Co-authored-by: somangshu <somangshu.goswami1508@gmail.com>
 2023-05-11 10:56:03 +05:30
Ivan Akulov
424d2f6965
chore: upgrade to prettier v2 + enforce import types (#21013)Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com> Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com> 
## Description

This PR upgrades Prettier to v2 + enforces TypeScript’s [`import
type`](https://www.typescriptlang.org/docs/handbook/release-notes/typescript-3-8.html#type-only-imports-and-export)
syntax where applicable. It’s submitted as a separate PR so we can merge
it easily.

As a part of this PR, we reformat the codebase heavily:
- add `import type` everywhere where it’s required, and
- re-format the code to account for Prettier 2’s breaking changes:
https://prettier.io/blog/2020/03/21/2.0.0.html#breaking-changes

This PR is submitted against `release` to make sure all new code by team
members will adhere to new formatting standards, and we’ll have fewer
conflicts when merging `bundle-optimizations` into `release`. (I’ll
merge `release` back into `bundle-optimizations` once this PR is
merged.)

### Why is this needed?

This PR is needed because, for the Lodash optimization from
7cbb12af88,
we need to use `import type`. Otherwise, `babel-plugin-lodash` complains
that `LoDashStatic` is not a lodash function.

However, just using `import type` in the current codebase will give you
this:

<img width="962" alt="Screenshot 2023-03-08 at 17 45 59"
src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/2953267/223775744-407afa0c-e8b9-44a1-90f9-b879348da57f.png">

That’s because Prettier 1 can’t parse `import type` at all. To parse it,
we need to upgrade to Prettier 2.

### Why enforce `import type`?

Apart from just enabling `import type` support, this PR enforces
specifying `import type` everywhere it’s needed. (Developers will get
immediate TypeScript and ESLint errors when they forget to do so.)

I’m doing this because I believe `import type` improves DX and makes
refactorings easier.

Let’s say you had a few imports like below. Can you tell which of these
imports will increase the bundle size? (Tip: it’s not all of them!)

```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import { Position } from "codemirror";
import { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```

It’s pretty hard, right?

What about now?

```ts
// app/client/src/workers/Linting/utils.ts
import type { Position } from "codemirror";
import type { LintError as JSHintError, LintOptions } from "jshint";
import { get, isEmpty, isNumber, keys, last, set } from "lodash";
```

Now, it’s clear that only `lodash` will be bundled.

This helps developers to see which imports are problematic, but it
_also_ helps with refactorings. Now, if you want to see where
`codemirror` is bundled, you can just grep for `import \{.*\} from
"codemirror"` – and you won’t get any type-only imports.

This also helps (some) bundlers. Upon transpiling, TypeScript erases
type-only imports completely. In some environment (not ours), this makes
the bundle smaller, as the bundler doesn’t need to bundle type-only
imports anymore.

## Type of change

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


## How Has This Been Tested?

This was tested to not break the build.

### 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
- [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes
- [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag


### QA activity:
- [ ] Test plan has been approved by relevant developers
- [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by QA
- [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by either SDET or
manual QA
- [ ] Organized project review call with relevant stakeholders after
Round 1/2 of QA
- [ ] Added Test Plan Approved label after reveiwing all Cypress test

---------

Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <hello@satishgandham.com>
Co-authored-by: Satish Gandham <satish.iitg@gmail.com>
 2023-03-16 17:11:47 +05:30
Tolulope Adetula
e36a28d7da
feat: Select default value control (#15856) 
* feat: Multiselect default Check

* Fix: failing tests

* fix: review issues

* fix: build errors

* fix: review issues

* fix: unused vars

* fix: failing tests

* Fix: default value issue

* Merge branch 'release' into fix/Select-default-Value-validation

* Fix: Default Value Control

* fix: updated Multiselect

* Fix: issues with curly braces

* fix: Serverside filtering issue

* fix: revert commit

* Fix: empty commit

* fix: copy-paste widgets

* fix: use WidgetOperationSaga to fix copy-paste

* fix: update comment

* feat: add test for copy-past Select and MultiSelect
 2022-08-18 08:10:58 +01:00