b0f69502b8
68 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Trisha Anand
|
72504222e7
|
chore: Splitting JS Object body dump vs parsed JS Object update to remove race condition originated bad state (#33124)
## Description > [!TIP] > _Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or extremely technical (helps the content, marketing, and DevRel team)._ > > _Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR._ Fixes #`Issue Number` _or_ Fixes `Issue URL` > [!WARNING] > _If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid._ ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/9029211697> > Commit: 190f7682cad3117e776d94f1502609026633369c > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=9029211697&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> ## Communication Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change? - [ ] Yes - [ ] No --------- Co-authored-by: Nidhi Nair <nidhi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Diljit VJ <diljit@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
de97783b79
|
fix: Workspace name editor input going away on hovering other menu items of workspace (#33179)
## Description - Fixing workspace name editor input going away on hovering other menu items of workspace - Improving code splitting of some existing files Fixes [#32359](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/32359) ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.All" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8967913548> > Commit: 054e745df86e0115e49be6aaa4173961259c9921 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8967913548&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> ## Communication Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change? - [ ] Yes - [ ] No |
||
|
Anagh Hegde
|
0d89168d00
|
fix: collection id not updated in import block API response (#32933)
## Description > [!TIP] > _Add a TL;DR when the description is longer than 500 words or extremely technical (helps the content, marketing, and DevRel team)._ > > _Please also include relevant motivation and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change. Add links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR._ Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/32903 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Sanity" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8892306251> > Commit: 6b2c1c8e637dc89eebf51d431f5e78f92ae9ac23 > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8892306251&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> ## Communication Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change? - [ ] Yes - [x] No <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced functionality to set collection IDs during partial imports. - **Tests** - Improved testing for partial imports by adding new assertions to verify action names. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Jacques Ikot <jacquesikot@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
6244e28fed
|
chore: Update analytics to pass the correct source information in identify user call (#32591)
## Description Updating analytics to pass the correct source information Fixes [#32266](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/32266) ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Sanity" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8750877755> > Commit: 6fedefebd3867aee79877b7ed105c90888005cfd > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8750877755&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> |
||
|
Jacques Ikot
|
0118051301
|
feat: implement dropping building blocks on canvas (#31857)
## Description > [!TIP] **Goal** To drag any building blocks from the explorer and drop at any position on the users canvas with full implementation. **Implementation** - Show skeleton widget when building block is initially dragged unto the canvas. - Make API call to add datasources, queries, and JS to existing page of users app - Get returned widget DSL and use existing copy paste logic to display widgets on the canvas - Remove loading state, handle clean up for copy paste - Run all queries newly created by the dropped building block **Limitations** - There is a loading state and the process is not instant like dropping a widget This PR is followed by this one [here](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/31406), which displays the loading state when a building block is dragged unto the canvas. Fixes #31856 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Templates, @tag.MainContainer, @tag.Visual, @tag.Widget" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!TIP] > 🟢 🟢 🟢 All cypress tests have passed! 🎉 🎉 🎉 > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8701664455> > Commit: 456a7a0a322e76974a7f5c41a6c1e274ef82e4ea > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8701664455&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new "Building Blocks" category in the widget sidebar for enhanced organization and accessibility. - Added functionality to resize building blocks with new horizontal and vertical limits. - Implemented a "see more" button for "Building Blocks" to display all associated widgets. - Enhanced drag and drop functionality for building blocks on the canvas. - **Enhancements** - Improved sorting logic for widgets, prioritizing "Building Blocks". - Enhanced widget search functionality within the sidebar. - **Bug Fixes** - Adjusted default rows and columns settings for explorer building blocks to improve layout and usability. - **Documentation** - Updated messages and constants related to new features for clarity and consistency. - **Refactor** - Refactored drag and drop handling logic to support new building block constraints and features. - Updated application state management to include building blocks related data. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Anagh Hegde <anagh@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
c8f1b82ca5
|
fix: action selector create flow (#32326)
## Description Fixes the broken flow where, on creation of a query or JS object in via the ActionCreator UI, the widget property that initiated it, does not get bound to the newly created item. We will now keep reference of the setter method that would set the binding value to the property and when the item is created, it will call the method with the correct bind value. This will wait till that particular action type is created. Fixes #7745 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.JS" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!IMPORTANT] > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8550162310> > Commit: `57e69a0c47496d1a1ee97e04991f34ca79440181` > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8550162310&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> > All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉 <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced the ability to create new queries and JavaScript functions directly from action creators, enhancing the workflow for building applications. - Added support for binding newly created queries, APIs, and JavaScript objects to button onClick events, streamlining the process of connecting actions to UI elements. - **Enhancements** - Improved the code modularity and readability in the Editor Navigation by refactoring the logic for closing announcement modals. - **Tests** - Added regression tests to ensure the reliability of creating actions via an action selector and their proper binding to properties. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Anagh Hegde
|
997fd96dce
|
feat: captcha for invite user flow (#31715)
## Description Add captcha for the invite user flow. Fixes https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/CGBPVEJ5C/p1710134091696379 https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31789 ## Automation /ok-to-test tags="@tag.Workspace" ### 🔍 Cypress test results <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> > [!IMPORTANT] > Workflow run: <https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/8321963367> > Commit: `769030f0a3deb09e256c38cba7d6d30a9a80a379` > Cypress dashboard url: <a href="https://internal.appsmith.com/app/cypress-dashboard/rundetails-65890b3c81d7400d08fa9ee5?branch=master&workflowId=8321963367&attempt=1" target="_blank">Click here!</a> > All cypress tests have passed 🎉🎉🎉 <!-- end of auto-generated comment: Cypress test results --> <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Integrated Google reCAPTCHA in the user invitation form to enhance security during form submissions. - **Enhancements** - Improved handling of URL parameters in utility functions for more robust data processing. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Jacques Ikot
|
78f269bcc8
|
feat: drag and drop building block on canvas with skeleton loader (#31406)
## Description **Goal** To allow users drag and drop building blocks on the canvas just like widgets today. We are also implementing a loading state with the platform skeleton component immediately the user drops the block on the canvas. **Why** The dropping of building blocks needs to make an API call to the backend to process adding the building block functionality to the users app. This loading skeleton acts as a placeholder for the block while the API call is processing. **How** 1. We had listed the building blocks in a previous [PR](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/pull/31199) 2. Created a new saga to handle widget and building block addition called `addUIEntitySaga` 3. The saga handles widget addition like it did previously, but also handles building block addition to canvas. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31314 #### 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 - [ ] 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 drag-and-drop functionality for building blocks within the canvas editor. - Added a new feature flag to enable/disable drag-and-drop building blocks. - Implemented new UI components such as `SeeMoreButton`, `UIEntityList`, and `UIEntitySidebar` for enhanced widget management and exploration. - Enhanced widget sidebar with improved search and filter capabilities. - **Enhancements** - Updated various components and sagas to support the new drag-and-drop functionality and building blocks management. - Improved loading and organization of UI explorer items, including widgets and building blocks. - **Refactor** - Adjusted import paths and reorganized imports across multiple files for better code maintenance. - Consolidated widget addition logic under a unified saga for handling different UI entity types. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed the directory structure for the `useIsEditorPaneSegmentsEnabled` hook to reflect recent changes. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ayush Pahwa
|
0a5255c5dd
|
feat: workflow queries/actions rename code split (#31300)
## Description This PR is code split PR for allowing rename of queries, actions and apis for workflows editor. This PR introduces update in the type of the query rename payload API. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30963 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
cc620b3ab3
|
feat: removing delete multiple apps feature (#30661)
## Description Removing the bulk delete applications feature as it not generally used by many users and this was creating some UI conflicts rather than giving us some valuable output. Please follow this thread for more context : https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C02Q4B2AGM8/p1706249168968689 #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30660 > 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 application deletion process to handle multiple deletions more efficiently. - **Bug Fixes** - Removed redundant code and unused features related to the multiple selection and deletion of applications. - **Chores** - Cleaned up various files by removing unused imports, constants, and state variables. - **Documentation** - Adjusted code comments and documentation to reflect removal of multiple application deletion features and related UI elements. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
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> |
||
|
Vemparala Surya Vamsi
|
ad68825818
|
feat: Frontend changes for consolidated-api with EE test case support (#30506) | ||
|
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
|
92993cccef
|
chore: Remove unused services (#30292)
I've been doing this in pieces bit by bit, not to rock the boat too much too fast, but it's taking too long, and too much effort. Instead opting for a rip-the-bandaid style, hopefully without the pain. |
||
|
Vemparala Surya Vamsi
|
8bb61d996a
|
chore: reverted consolidated api (#30314)
## Description Reverted consolidated api changes and also some CE related changes to make it compatible with EE. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Reverts #29650 & #29939 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > > > ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Enhanced the reliability and efficiency of Cypress e2e tests by adjusting wait conditions and assertions. - Simplified network request handling across various test cases. - Updated test logic to align with changes in application data structure and network requests. - **Tests** - Improved test stability for application import/export, Git sync, page load behavior, and widget interactions. - Refined mobile responsiveness tests to accurately validate layout conversions and autofill behaviors. - **Chores** - Removed deprecated feature flags and code related to consolidated page load functionality. - Cleaned up unused parameters and simplified action payloads in Redux actions. - **Documentation** - Updated comments for clarity in test specifications. - **Style** - Adjusted code styling for consistency across test suites. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed data retrieval logic in tests to ensure correct data extraction from API responses. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Vemparala Surya Vamsi
|
96701c343d
|
feat: Frontend changes for consolidated-api (#29933)
## Description Our objective in this pr is to improve the page load time of our application by calling a consolidated-api which contains all the resources to load our pages. This PR contains all the client side changes to call the consolidated-api as well as feature flag related changes. Fixes #29650 & #29939 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [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 - [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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Updated network request aliases and response handling in end-to-end tests. - **New Features** - Introduced a new API class `ConsolidatedPageLoadApi` for fetching consolidated page load data. - **Tests** - Enhanced testing for application URL navigation and data retrieval. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Nilesh Sarupriya
|
7fcbb44d7d
|
chore: refactor executeActions and create plugin trigger which supports queries w/ and w/o datasources (#30001)
## Description > Refactor code changes. > 1. refactor `executeActions` so that Appsmith headers can be transiently added to actionConfiguration, which is used as a parameter in `executeParameterizedWithMetrics`. This would render the Appsmith headers usable in the PluginExecutor. > 2. Introduce a new plugin API `POST /plugins/<plugin_id>/trigger` to replace the `POST /datasource/<datasource_id>/trigger`. This is done to decouple the trigger API from `datasource_id` which can then be used for fetching the dynamic data for queries (w/ or w/o datasources). #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [[Task]: Create basic workflow plugin structure](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30120) Fixes [[Task]: Trigger API to populate workflow names dynamically.](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30134) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] JUnit - Existing test cases should pass. ## 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new `INTERNAL` plugin type for enhanced integration capabilities. - Added trigger functionality for plugins, enabling dynamic data fetching for query forms. - **Enhancements** - Improved the plugin execution flow with additional parameters to better handle action and datasource triggers. - **Bug Fixes** - Standardized request header naming across the application for consistency and to prevent potential conflicts. - **Documentation** - Added new error types and codes for better error handling and user feedback. - **Refactor** - Updated method signatures to include HTTP headers for more robust action execution. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> |
||
|
ashit-rath
|
3e029515e1
|
chore: js module function name change refactor (#30073)
## Description Refactor for updating js object function name change refactor logic to include modules #### PR fixes following issue(s) PR for https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3242 #### 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 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved action interface to enhance flexibility in action management. - **New Features** - Introduced module support within the action framework. - **Tests** - Updated tests to accommodate new module-related changes. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
410a55cf3c
|
fix: Refactoring code to fix a couple of issues related to modules on EE (#29843)
## Description Refactoring code to fix a couple of issues related to modules on EE #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#29842](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/29842) [#29445](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/29445) #### 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 - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] 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 - [ ] 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 interface for improved action context handling. - Added functionality to create API actions based on the editor type. - Implemented a new hook for retrieving parent entity information in the datasource editor. - **Refactor** - Updated various components to utilize the new `ActionParentEntityTypeInterface`. - Enhanced reducer logic for better handling of action configurations. - Streamlined entity exports and imports for consistency. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed redirection logic in the Datasource Blank State component for a smoother user experience. - **Chores** - Removed unused event listeners from sagas to optimize performance. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
235122e7e3
|
chore: Refactoring API wiring for actions and JS actions to support private entity renaming on EE (#29763)
## Description Refactoring API wiring for actions and JS actions to support private entity renaming on EE. Also handles a couple of other issues (refer the issue attached below) #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#29762](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/29762) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced action and JS object naming capabilities with new context-aware options. - Added support for organizing actions and JS objects within modules. - **Improvements** - Streamlined the process of renaming actions and JS objects to be more intuitive and context-sensitive. - **Refactor** - Updated internal type declarations for consistency and future extensibility. - **User Interface** - Improved UI elements to reflect the new naming and organizational features for actions and JS objects. - **Bug Fixes** - Corrected logic to ensure proper handling of the `isPublic` flag within JS collections. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
|
078ef8a538
|
chore: Cleanup of some deprecated objects (#29577) | ||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
cc61ca4c47
|
chore: Refactoring queries/JS section on entity explorer to support private entities on packages (#29703)
## Description Refactoring queries/JS section on entity explorer to support private entities on packages #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#28495](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/28495) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced new search filtering capabilities in the global search. - Enhanced the `EntityExplorer` component to selectively display files based on new criteria. - **Enhancements** - Expanded `JSCollection` interface to support workflow associations and contextual actions. - **Refactor** - Streamlined naming functions with the introduction of `CreateNewActionKey` enum to ensure consistency in action creation. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
Ayush Pahwa
|
848afaf878
|
feat: workflows create js object code split (#29627)
Co-authored-by: Druthi Polisetty <druthi@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetunandu@gmail.com> |
||
|
Pawan Kumar
|
f0672f6f04
|
chore: Create a separate theme settings panel for WDS (#29196)
Fixes #28516 |
||
|
Pawan Kumar
|
93c173c0e3
|
fix: Branding changes are not getting applied on release-ee. Not working on local pull either (#29159)
Fixes #29140 |
||
|
dependabot[bot]
|
037d2fabb0
|
chore(deps): bump axios from 0.27.2 to 1.6.0 in /app/client (#28776)
Bumps [axios](https://github.com/axios/axios) from 0.27.2 to 1.6.0. <details> <summary>Release notes</summary> <p><em>Sourced from <a href="https://github.com/axios/axios/releases">axios's releases</a>.</em></p> <blockquote> <h2>Release v1.6.0</h2> <h2>Release notes:</h2> <h3>Bug Fixes</h3> <ul> <li><strong>CSRF:</strong> fixed CSRF vulnerability CVE-2023-45857 (<a href="https://redirect.github.com/axios/axios/issues/6028">#6028</a>) (<a href=" |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
fd33730241
|
feat: Adds partial import functionality (#28293)
## Description This pull request adds partial import/export functionality to the Appsmith application at page level, allowing users to import and export specific widgets, data sources, queries, and custom JS libraries. The functionality is behind a feature flag and includes loading and done states. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #27376 > 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 - [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 - [ ] 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: Jacques Ikot <jacquesikot@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Anagh Hegde <anagh@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Nidhi
|
57abc1d361
|
chore: Modified refactor flow to use entity specific services (#28621) | ||
|
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> |
||
|
Dipyaman Biswas
|
3461b689c2
|
feat: code split JSActionAPI and JSActionSagas (#28534)
## Description Code split JSActionAPI and JSActionSagas #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/issues/2601 #### 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 - [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 |
||
|
Abhinav Jha
|
651f944b41
|
chore: Send applicationDetail in create application payload (#28272)
## Description - Add the `applicationDetail` payload to the create application request. - This allows instances which have Anvil enabled, to default to Anvil when an application is created. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #28237 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress - If all existing tests pass, we're good to merge ## 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: nilansh <nilansh@appsmith.com> |
||
|
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 |
||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
018b845af7
|
fix: revert for super users and update ui for profiling ques for non super users (#27942) | ||
|
Valera Melnikov
|
9eac55a380
|
chore: add consistent-type-definitions rule (#27907)
## Description Add consistent-type-definitions rule |
||
|
Valera Melnikov
|
fb12f6ad87
|
chore:add eslint rules (#27878)
Add eslint rules - promise-function-async - prefer-nullish-coalescing |
||
|
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> |
||
|
Ayangade Adeoluwa
|
7c42402b30
|
feat: revamp welcome page feature (#27228) | ||
|
Aman Agarwal
|
3fc29dc459
|
feat: functionality to delete multiple apps at once (#26750) | ||
|
Ayush Pahwa
|
9f5cd47f0d
|
chore: code split for EE PR 2169 (#26669)
## Description Code split for EE PR [#2169](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/2169) #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes [#2164 EE issue](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/issues/2164) |
||
|
Hetu Nandu
|
31bca0b123
|
feat: Email Verification (#25854)
## Description Adds a setting for Admin Users to enable Email verification of users who are signing up using "Form login" When enabled, it will send a verification email to a user who is signing up on a tenant and only when they verify (by clicking on the link in email) they will be allowed to proceed to the rest of the sign up process. Corresponding EE PR for the email template: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/2153 #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #21387 Fixes #25552 #### 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) - This change requires a documentation update ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress We have mocked server apis to respond with different states and tested the ui on that change #### Test Plan https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/issues/2459 > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [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-) - [x] 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: nilansh <nilansh@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Ankita Kinger
|
9e5a38b3d9
|
chore: Move saving of branding config to tenant config (#26316)
## Description Move saving of branding config to tenant config #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest - [x] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
ChandanBalajiBP
|
1e461558e2
|
fix: Save and authorise flow in current editing environment (#26212)
Co-authored-by: manish kumar <manish@appsmith.com> |
||
|
ChandanBalajiBP
|
fc63d3b074
|
chore: Update api current env function (#25683) | ||
|
Shrikant Sharat Kandula
|
3129e88e95
|
chore: Move Maps API Key to database (#20771)
1. Changing the Maps API Key doesn't need restart anymore. 2. The `isRestartRequired` field in the response of updating env settings, was being ignored. The client owns the decision of when to restart (which is correct), so removed this from the server. 3. Write Maps API Key to the database, in the tenant configuration. 4. The Settings page for Maps Ke gets the current value from `/tenant/current` response, and not `/admin/env`. 5. Removed `APPSMITH_GOOGLE_MAPS_API_KEY` from `/admin/env` response. 6. Tests. DO NOT MERGE. Please only review/approve. This is expected to break EE once it goes there, which I intend to solve alongside merging this. Changing the Maps API Key will update it both in the tenant config in the database, as well as in the `docker.env` file. This is predominantly for backwards compatibility, and phased rollout. As part of a separate PR, we'll have a migration that proactively copies the env variable value to the database, and comment out the value in the `docker.env` file. Then we can stop updating the `docker.env` file as well. ## New  ## Old  --------- Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> |
||
|
tkAppsmith
|
8342d15b03
|
feat: added api to return 1 product message (#24704)
## Description > Need an api to vend out messages for users alerting them of breaking changes in upcoming releases. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23064 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > This should be tested using curl by hitting the api endpoint endpoint without any context and get a message in return that was configured in a config file. ## 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 - [ ] 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> Co-authored-by: Hetu Nandu <hetu@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Nilansh Bansal
|
b3f1805e36
|
feat: Flagsmith Integration (#24472)
## Description > This PR integrates Flagsmith feature flagging into the Appsmith codebase > It also sets some default traits such as instance_id, tenant_id and email/hashed email to the new and existing users #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #24037 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [x] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [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> |
||
|
Nilesh Sarupriya
|
0bbb8008b0
|
fix: move instance-name to tenant config; move update tenant config flow to CE (#24468)
## Description > Move the Instance Name to Tenant Configuration. > Move the updateTenantConfiguration API to CE #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/24286 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > Currently this has been tested manually. Need to add unit test for the same. #### 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: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Sangeeth Sivan <sangeeth@appsmith.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Dhruvik Neharia
|
94ebacdf80
|
chore: Add two more sentry logs when REQUEST_NOT_AUTHORISED and PAGE_NOT_FOUND alongwith rejecting respective promises with the whole error object (#24203)
## Description #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23972 #### 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 - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
Nilesh Sarupriya
|
98a8287697
|
chore: add utility for widget level acl (#23526)
## Description > This is a utility code change for supporting Widget Level ACL in Appsmith-EE. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/23260 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > A test case has been added to assert the user management role. #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [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/Test-plan-implementation#speedbreaker-features-to-consider-for-every-change) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans/_edit#areas-of-interest) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed --------- Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ankita Kinger <ankita@appsmith.com> |
||
|
Rahul Barwal
|
53ea8e208b
|
feat: Adds option to fork an app within the app editor (#23158)
## Description
* Fork within application, this needs 2 things:
* Load the workspaceList even when we have setModalClose variable set
* When fork is successful, on the next page it should close the forking
modal
* Adds forking model to EditorAppName menu
* Adds FETCH_APPLICATION_INIT to forkApplicationSaga
* This makes sure that when we fork an app from within another app,
it will reinitialize the new app properly.
* Corrects workspaceId variable for forkApplicationSaga
#### PR fixes following issue(s)
Fixes # (issue number)
#21470
#### Media
#### Type of change
- New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
## Testing
#### How Has This Been Tested?
- [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
- [ ] 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/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
|
||
|
ChandanBalajiBP
|
888d9c0223
|
chore: Send default environmentId in header of all api call (#23745)
## Description > Send unused_env as environmentId in all API header call. > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #23766 > #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? This changes is w.r.t #1521 PR in EE. Which will be tested in regression. - [x] Regression > > ## 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 flagx #### 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 |
