f376eb0d45
6982 Commits
| Author | SHA1 | Message | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
f376eb0d45
|
fix: Removed box-shadow for the active tab that is causing a visual artefact. (#31608)
Removed box-shadow for the active tab that is causing a visual artefact. <img width="328" alt="image" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/101088862/6e7ed92a-fb74-4994-969d-d92188f0ffc6"> |
||
|
|
a8e1a8f6a6
|
fix: Background color change for the tab bar (#31607)
Changed the background color of the tab bar to #FFF to minimise background colors in the tab bar area. |
||
|
|
1da73775b8
|
chore: create action source instrumentation added (#31585)
## Description Added server side create action instrumentation for following cases: Action | Source | Frontend/Backend | Tests Added? -- | -- | -- | -- Create Action / query from any other place in app (entity explorer / datasource preview / ombinar) | self | source sent from frontend | Cypress Drag a table widget → Click connect data → Select datasource → select table → click on connect data | one-click-binding | source sent from frontend | Cypress Generate CRUD triggered from new page menu or datasource preview | generate-crud-page | source set in backend | No When page is cloned | clone-page | source set in backend | No When application is forked | fork-application | source set in backend | No #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31173 > 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 - 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 - [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 - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced event tracking capabilities by introducing an enumeration to track the source of action creation for analytics. - **Enhancements** - Improved action creation flow by specifying the source in various components, aiding in precise analytics and debugging. - Streamlined analytics properties method across services for consistency and simplicity. - **Bug Fixes** - Adjusted assertion logic in Cypress tests to validate the source of action creation accurately, ensuring reliability in automated testing. - **Refactor** - Simplified method signatures and logic in server-side analytics handling for better maintainability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: “sneha122” <“sneha@appsmith.com”> |
||
|
|
98edccb970
|
chore: Add back Preview Mode shortcut (#31602)
Adds back the preview mode shortcut now with a modifier key to be `⌥ + P` on mac or `Alt + P` on windows <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced the Preview Mode with additional hotkeys (`alt + p`) for toggling, improving user experience in navigating the editor. - Improved tooltip messages for better clarity on shortcuts available to the user. - **Tests** - Updated regression tests to cover new Preview Mode functionality and ensure its reliability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
0c2f1a27e0
|
feat: Add functionality to enforce strong password for form signups (#31605)
**PR to selectively enable strong password requirements.** Fixes: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31525 |
||
|
|
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 --> |
||
|
|
0cf09018b9
|
feat: list building blocks in explorer (#31199)
## Description This is step 1 of completing the addition of building blocks within the canvas explorer. It adds building blocks to the explorer and hides the functionality behind a feature flag - release_drag_drop_building_blocks_enabled. 1. Create a new hook to manage explorer items - widgets and building blocks 2. Define the max items to display in the explorer for each tag 3. Define a utility function to return all explorer items alongside the maxNoToRender per tag 4. Rename WidgetSidebarWithTags to UIEntitySidebar and move into a new sidebar folder 5. Adjust newly renamed UIEntitySidebar to implement loading for building blocks, new listing of blocks and widgets and manage "See more" functionality for all items in explorer. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31146 #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced new constants and functions to optimize widget management and search functionality. - Added loading indicators and a "See More" button for better user interaction with widget cards. - Enhanced widget filtering and display based on user interactions and tag categories. - Implemented a custom hook for managing UI explorer items like widgets and building blocks. - **Refactor** - Updated import paths for better code organization and readability. - **Style** - Adjusted widget card rendering based on tags for an improved visual hierarchy and user experience. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Rahul Barwal <rahul.barwal@appsmith.com> |
||
|
|
1cce29987c
|
chore: [Map chart widget] Replace fusion charts with Echarts as chart provider (#31482)
# Description This pr replaces fusion chart lib with echarts in the map chart widget. It also checkins the necessary maps. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31081 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [x] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Updated the Widget interface to make link properties optional, enhancing flexibility. - Added a `retryPromise` function for improved error handling and retry logic in asynchronous operations. - Introduced new mapping data and utilities for the MapChartWidget, enabling detailed country/region information and dynamic map types. - **Enhancements** - Improved error handling in widget callouts to gracefully handle missing links. - Enhanced the MapChartWidget with new functionalities including dynamic map data loading, chart resizing, and skeleton UI for loading state. - **Refactor** - Refactored chart configurations and event handling in MapChartWidget for better performance and readability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
cf6ba4c8fd
|
chore: Remove FEATURE_FLAG release_custom_widgets_enabled (#31577)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description > Add a TL;DR when description is extra long (helps content team) > > Please include a summary of the changes and which issue has been fixed. Please also include relevant motivation > and context. List any dependencies that are required for this change > > Links to Notion, Figma or any other documents that might be relevant to the PR > > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Removed feature flag checks and related functionality across the application, impacting widget visibility and behavior. - **Tests** - Updated test setups and cases to align with the removal of feature flag dependencies. - **Chores** - Cleaned up unused code and constants related to the now-removed feature flags. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
035f744327
|
fix: Routing issues in Side by Side (#31551) | ||
|
|
c6b09defe9
|
feat: Changed add button to toggle button in left pane (#31523)
## Description Changes add button in left pane to toggle button. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31522 #### 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) - 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 - [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 - **New Features** - Improved entity identification in navigation based on URL path and query parameters. - **Refactor** - Updated the editor tabs to use `ToggleButton` for enhanced user interaction. - **Bug Fixes** - Modified logic in hooks for creating a new JS collection to handle segment mode appropriately. - Adjusted URL generation logic in the `useQueryAdd` hook for better functionality. - Enhanced conditions in the `identifyEntityFromPath` function to identify entities based on URL path endings and query ID values. - **Tests** - Updated test setup for the `JS Segment` component to include specific `pathname` for `useLocation` mocking. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
c5aae757e5
|
fix: fixing canvas resizer jumps when a keydown event happens in preview mode. (#31578)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In this PR, we are fixing a minor issue with MainCanvasResizer. Bug: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/35134347/5d76fd06-9786-4fcf-a189-62c3698505fa #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved the resizing behavior of main container elements by optimizing width calculation logic. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
53f355a830
|
chore: change saas authentication to context based (#31064)
## Description > Add context based authentication instead of being bounded by page. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > N/A #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual #### Test Plan > N/A #### Issues raised during DP testing > N/A ## 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 - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced request handling for Appsmith tokens with additional parameters for broader context. - Streamlined integration processes with new data transfer objects. - **Refactor** - Consolidated integration functionalities for improved code reusability. - Optimized authentication process with updated method signatures. - **Documentation** - Updates in user and developer interactions with the API, focusing on token requests and integrations. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Nilesh Sarupriya <20905988+nsarupr@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Ayush Pahwa <ayushpahwa96@gmail.com> |
||
|
|
c2744a37d0
|
fix: Get rid of two labels (#31491)
Fixes #31289 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Ensured certain experimental features ("ab_wds_enabled" and "release_anvil_enabled") are always enabled for testing purposes. - **Refactor** - Improved the reliability of widget configuration updates by ensuring modifications are made on a cloned object, preserving the original data integrity. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
|
beba3afb60
|
chore: Removing partner program callout from invite modal (#31576) | ||
|
|
b0e9608189
|
chore: Fixing Anvil DnD in zones (#31489)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description In this PR, we are making changes to how widgets are moved inside zones. previous changes missed to cater to basic small widget movement within a zone. Now when widgets move inside a zone. - for small widgets, we look for layout based on highlight info and add widgets to it. - for large widgets, we create a new layout next to the layout mentioned in the highlight info and add widgets to it like adding new widgets Same logic propagets to copy paste based widget addition as well. Additional fixes: - Widgets were being moved in the order of selection, now we use position data to sort them and place based on position data. - Widgets were not allowed to click and deselect(mostly used while trying to multi select via cmd + click) #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed |
||
|
|
825304f7af
|
fix: workflows query issues (#31567)
## Description Changelog - Removed create module options from workflows queries inside apps - Added error handling for undefined js actions #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31048 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced the action entity component to include `pluginType`, enabling conditional rendering of menu options based on the plugin type. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed an issue in the JavaScript action utility to safely iterate over variables, preventing errors when the variable list is uninitialized. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
6ba2f350bf
|
fix: added margin top to the onboarding flow if banner visible (#31497)
## Description Earlier the since the license banner had fixed position which was making the skip section gets hidden. Hence as the page header is positioned 40px below the banner if it is visible. We are doing the same for the onboarding flow. <img width="1439" alt="Screenshot 2024-03-05 at 11 33 47 PM" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/7565635/e7912fb5-b84d-49fd-86fa-3baa888c51fa"> #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30953 #### Media https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/7565635/c090e06a-0cee-49a4-a48d-5b14dd79bf19 |
||
|
|
530bbb9edf
|
chore: Re-ordering the menu for APIs and Queries & deleting BetaTag component as its deprecated (#31552) | ||
|
|
047134d7ce
|
fix: missing js arguments so making it optional (#31550) | ||
|
|
c209b47671
|
chore: clean up space distribution feature in Anvil (#31468)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description This PR addresses two particular things with space distribution - Issue: Space distribution distributing more than max column limit space - Enhancement: Replace flew grow css for zones to flex basis to make sure column widths are even irresepective of number of zones in a section. Additional Fixes: - replaced test id of widgets editor to abide by repo standards. - disable crud app generation feature for Anvil. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enabled new feature flags to enhance application capabilities. - Introduced dynamic space redistribution for improved layout management. - Added "Generate App" functionality for users with specific feature access. - **Enhancements** - Updated UI selectors for better consistency and reliability. - Refined layout system logic to always utilize the Anvil layout system. - **Refactor** - Optimized feature flag selection logic for efficiency. - Improved flex property handling in layout components for more accurate space distribution. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
52ae6e0030
|
fix: Last selected js function / response does not load up (#31495) | ||
|
|
f45dc3baf2
|
fix: WDS Theming breaking on custom font (#31477)
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Improved theme management in the Canvas component for a more consistent design experience. - Removed unnecessary import of `FontFamily` from `@design-system/theming`. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
|
10fb3a012c
|
feat: ads package update for workflows icon (#31480)
## Description Updated ADS package for workflows and added icon in code for the same. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30174 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) #### 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 - **Style** - Updated the icon for workflows in the Explorer section to enhance visual representation. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
46b4252ae6
|
fix: side by side blank state, tooltip, and add button UI (#31479)
## Description This PR fixes following issues - JS and Query Blank state issue in side by side mode. - Added tooltip for minimize and maximize button. - Fixed add button getting squeezed issue. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31330 #### Media https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/e0e30e47-1f3a-447d-93a5-144e48360cec #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced tooltips for maximize and minimize buttons in the editor interface, enhancing user interaction. - Added new empty state components for JavaScript actions and queries, improving the user experience for adding new elements. - Implemented split-screen empty states for both JavaScript actions and queries, catering to users who prefer side-by-side editing. - **Enhancements** - Updated the editor's segmented header and full-screen tabs with tooltips, providing clearer guidance on button functionalities. - Adjusted the maximum width of tabs in the editor to accommodate additional elements, ensuring a more organized display. - **Refactor** - Replaced the use of `EmptyState` with new `Empty` components in JavaScript and Query editor panes, streamlining the interface and aligning with new functionalities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
07279c070e
|
fix: improved widgets layout (#31471)
## Description - Fixed text input widget width - Increased size of the separator for toolbarButtons - Fixed widgets label - Fixed behaviour for Boolean widgets. Removed Checkbox and Radio labelPosition. Fixed width for these widgets #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) #29088 #31250 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [x] Jest - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] 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 |
||
|
|
96058c679d
|
chore: removes feature flag logic for flipped CTAs (#31419)
## Description [#30394](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/30394) introduced an experiment to flip the primary and secondary CTAs in the datasource form. Experiment results [invalidated the hypothesis](https://theappsmith.slack.com/archives/C05P3ME9MBR/p1707714615475319?thread_ts=1706788945.493989&cid=C05P3ME9MBR), so this task is to clean up the code and remove the flag. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31045 #### Type of change - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [x] Cypress - also, tests have passed on ee pr: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3630 > > #### 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 - **Chores** - Removed an obsolete feature flag related to button styling in data source authentication. - **Refactor** - Simplified button styling logic on the data source authentication page, ensuring consistent appearance. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
c59a117944
|
fix: small modification for unavailable jsArguments on EE while importing JS module instance (#31469) | ||
|
|
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) |
||
|
|
5fdc0a1ef9
|
feat: workflows assign request on browser (#31159)
## Description We are allowing users to have write workflows assign request queries in the JS object editor for the workflows editor. This means, users should get autocomplete for `appsmith.workflows.assignRequest` and the arguments required should be shown in the autocomplete also. To enable this, following changes have been made 1) Add empty workflows object to the appsmith function type in store and and add ee only type definitions to the `EntityDefinitions` for appsmith namespace. 2) Replace entityFunctions as static variable and use a function which appends EE entity functions. 3) Added types for ee only functions 4) Retain the `isMainJsObject` flag for the js file when updates happen. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced new autocomplete definitions for enhanced code editor suggestions. - Added support for categorizing entities in the Explorer panel using `GROUP_TYPES` for improved organization and navigation. - **Refactor** - Updated the action helpers and reducers to support new properties and ensure state consistency. - Improved the structure for autocomplete helper functions, facilitating easier extension and maintenance. - **Chores** - Established foundational code for future development with empty enums and placeholder functions. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
77d5af1408
|
feat: workflow analytics code split and housekeeping (#31425)
## Description This pr is for code splitting of analytics events for workflows project. It also does a pending code split for the jsPaneSagas which got missed during the audit logs feature release. [EE PR](https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith-ee/pull/3636) Changelog - Added a context of parent for packages and workflows so the analytics events can have extra information. - Updated code split for audit logs feature. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31355 #### Type of change - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced analytics tracking for specific actions in the application, providing detailed insights into user behavior and action success rates. - Introduced context-aware data points for optimized analytics data collection, including parent context extraction from URLs. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
8db4cd3872
|
chore: create inline buttons widget (#31318)
Fixes #30438 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new `ButtonGroup` component that manages groups of buttons with customizable properties like color, size, and orientation. - Added a `ButtonGroupItem` component for rendering buttons within the `ButtonGroup`. - Launched an "Inline Buttons" widget allowing users to configure a group of buttons inline with various properties such as labels, visibility, and icons. - Enhanced icon loading with fallback styles for better spacing and appearance. - **Refactor** - Updated various components (ActionGroup, Button, Menu) to use new `ButtonGroupProps` and `ButtonGroupItemProps`, aligning with the new `ButtonGroup` component structure. - Renamed widget names and updated configurations to improve clarity and consistency across the application. - **Bug Fixes** - Fixed feature flag checks to directly return `true` for specific flags, ensuring feature availability checks are more efficient. - **Documentation** - Added comprehensive story and documentation for the `ButtonGroup` component, showcasing its usage with different options. - **Chores** - Enhanced internal codebase by optimizing the `Icon` component performance through memoization. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
|
90a53cb438
|
fix: Radio group options not accessible (#31382)
<!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Improved accessibility by adjusting the focus behavior of radio buttons. - Enhanced feature flag handling for more granular control over new features. - **Refactor** - Optimized feature flag checks for better performance and readability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> --------- Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
|
a0e87c3152
|
fix: default icon in statbox widget (#31418)
Fixes #31292 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Renamed the `icon` property to `iconName` in the Stat Box Widget configuration for clarity. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> Co-authored-by: Pawan Kumar <pawankumar@Pawans-MacBook-Pro-2.local> |
||
|
|
128e7bc686
|
fix: Enable multi widget selection in Anvil (#31305)
> Pull Request Template > > Use this template to quickly create a well written pull request. Delete all quotes before creating the pull request. > ## Description Fixing Selection to allow multi selection of widgets. > #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Refactor** - Enhanced widget selection and interaction by updating event handling across components. - Modified types to align with event handling needs. - Updated event detail objects and handling in various hooks and utilities. - **Tests** - Added new test cases for widget selection with Ctrl + Click. - Updated existing test cases for improved coverage and accuracy. - Enhanced test case descriptions for better clarity. - Introduced a new parameter in a test function for improved testing capabilities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
74ff7fcc91
|
fix: Modal overlay crop issue (#31375) | ||
|
|
ac1740aaa7
|
chore: git continuous delivery automation tests (#31131)
## Description Adds automation tests for Git continuous delivery #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31130 #### 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 the GitSync functionality for better user experience. - **New Features** - Added the ability to dynamically set test identifiers for the Copy button, enhancing testing capabilities. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
c9b34931b6
|
fix: Google Sheet Side by Side (#31378)
## Description Fixes GSheets (SaaS) routing for Side by Side - Adds the missing Datasource Editor when in split screen - Adds new SaaS Editor Route in Split Screen Query Segment - Fixes the URL resolution by taking a safer bet #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31379 <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced routing in the IDE to support a more streamlined editing experience for SAAS datasources. - Improved action resolution for Google Sheets, making it more straightforward to use within the app editor. - **Refactor** - Updated key naming and path structures for better clarity and maintenance in the codebase. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
1d4198048c
|
chore: Debugger Split states (#31043)
## Description Creates local states for the debugger for Query Pane, Api Pane and JS Pane and separates it from the main Canvas Debugger state. This is done so that in Split pane, the states of Action Pane debugger can be different from the Canvas Debugger state. To keep handling the Fullscreen Debugger experience, a new hook `useDebuggerTriggerClick` is introduced which opens the correct debugger based on the IDE state. Also removes the Error and Logs from the Query / Api / JS Debuggers when in split screen mode for a cleaner debugging experience ##### This change removes the expectation of having a common debugger state that follows around as the user navigates in the IDE. Instead it create a new debugger state per entity item. The tests have been updated to reflect this #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #30836 Fixes #30342 #### Media #### Type of change - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [ ] 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 |
||
|
|
5c5ae36275
|
fix: changes ds section headers to sentence case (#31371)
## Description  change all headers to sentence case: <img width="1156" alt="Screenshot 2024-02-29 at 10 10 56" src="https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/94514895/fd49d607-19f0-4104-9a02-fa14ba9ed86b"> retain camel case for integration names because they are brand names. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31370 #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Style** - Updated text casing for headings in SaaS and AI integrations sections for improved readability. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
1bcae40616
|
chore: Add spec for create new app from template (#31311)
## Description This pull request adds a cypress spec for create app from templates option. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enabled the creation of new applications directly from templates without the need for feature flags. - Enhanced user interface for selecting templates when creating new applications. - **Tests** - Added client-side regression tests for creating applications from templates. - **Refactor** - Streamlined the process for initiating the creation of an application from a template in the UI. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
0640b5ed93
|
fix: Run button hiding issue (#31323)
## Description Run button in queries and js page was getting squeezed when file name is longer. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31298 #### Media Before https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/5948c7ad-1c29-489a-8857-004876261c6c After https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/758b2cec-1e05-4ebf-903c-9fa16f3b6489 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [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 - **Style** - Enhanced styling and layout control across various editor components for improved user experience. - Adjusted widths and overflow properties for cleaner, more consistent visual presentation. - Introduced new layout properties to components for better alignment and spacing, ensuring a more intuitive interface. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
45f19ae8bf
|
fix: wds modal resizer (#31232)
## Description - Move canvas resizer by 1 DOM node higher. - Used `contain: strict;` for modal styles. **Before:**  **After:**  <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Style** - Improved modal overlay containment with updated CSS properties. - Enhanced page alignment with new centering style for the `PageViewWrapper` component. - **Refactor** - Streamlined canvas viewport handling in the Widgets Editor for better conditional styling. - **Chores** - Updated Cypress configuration to modify scroll behavior settings. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
a3597acae5
|
fix: Add useEffect hook to close modal when reconnecting modal is open (#31200)
## Description This pull request adds the useEffect hook to the CreateNewAppFromTemplatesWrapper component. The useEffect hook listens for changes in the isReconnectingModalOpen state and closes the modal when it is true. This ensures that the modal is closed when the reconnecting modal is open. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes # (issue number) > if no issue exists, please create an issue and ask the maintainers about this first > > #### Media > A video or a GIF is preferred. when using Loom, don’t embed because it looks like it’s a GIF. instead, just link to the video > > #### Type of change > Please delete options that are not relevant. - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) - New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality) - Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected) - Chore (housekeeping or task changes that don't impact user perception) - This change requires a documentation update > > > ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [ ] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [ ] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Introduced a new state to automatically close the modal when certain conditions are met, enhancing user experience. - Adjusted the control flow in the test scenario to improve accuracy. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
4e333512bb
|
fix: Make the active tab standout from the background (#31306)
Regression from the previous state where the background of the active tab has been missed. <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Style** - Updated the background color of the active tab in the editor for improved visibility and aesthetics. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
002af05cf1
|
fix: JS creation switches pages in Side by Side (#31297)
## Description Fixes useCallback dependency missing item that caused the JS creation to happen on an older page #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31296 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing #### How Has This Been Tested? - [x] Manual - [x] Jest <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced JavaScript creation functionality in the IDE to ensure it's associated with the correct page. - **Tests** - Added tests for creating JavaScript segments within the IDE. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
2f6761b3cd
|
feat: Updated minimize and maximize icons (#31304)
## Description Updated the icons for side by side layout minimize and maximize. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31303 #### 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 - [ ] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress > > #### Test Plan > Add Testsmith test cases links that relate to this PR > > #### Issues raised during DP testing > Link issues raised during DP testing for better visiblity and tracking (copy link from comments dropped on this PR) > > > ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **Style** - Updated the maximize and minimize icons in the editor for a refreshed look. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
32955bcab8
|
feat: Added modal for action creator new query option (#31210)
## Description Before, when use clicks on new query from action selector, omnibar used to show to create a new query. This PR removed showing omnibar and instead will start showing a modal with similar content as add pane. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/issues/31217 #### Media Before https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/641a1409-bc9c-42be-907f-02157faf901e After https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/87797149/c1ee3d29-1fef-4de2-8c34-3e2bedc4081f #### 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 - [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 - **New Features** - Introduced a new modal for creating items, enhancing user interaction and productivity. - Added omnibar trigger sources to refine search functionalities based on the context of use. - Implemented a function to dynamically generate messages for creating new items, improving user guidance. - **Enhancements** - Enhanced the global search by including additional trigger sources, allowing for more precise search operations. - Improved the property pane with a toggle for a new creation modal, streamlining the process of adding new items. - **Refactor** - Optimized query list item creation and management within the editor, ensuring a smoother user experience. - Refined action dispatch mechanisms to better support side-by-side editing modes. - **UI Improvements** - Updated the UI to include a new create new modal, making it easier for users to add queries and other items. - Enhanced search results handling to better accommodate different trigger sources and editor modes. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
9e70ebe658
|
fix: 'are you sure' state reset (#31227)
## Description We have to reset the state of "are you sure" after closing the menu, currently it sticks around once the user clicks on the delete button. #### PR fixes following issue(s) Fixes #31278 #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) > > > ## 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 - [ ] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced state management for the `confirmDelete` action across various editor components, ensuring a more intuitive user experience when interacting with context menus. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |
||
|
|
c1207db0f5
|
fix: preserve order of widgets during multiple widget drag and drop (#31273)
## Description Issues: 1. Order of widgets is not preserved during DnD. 2. DnD of small and large widgets together results in them being added to the same row. Fix: 1. Reuse zone utils to manage DnD of small and large widgets. 2. Account for the number of entities being added to preserve the order of addition. #### Media https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/assets/5424788/cc936242-4ea0-412e-b1bf-e62a196e228f #### Type of change - Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue) ## Testing > #### How Has This Been Tested? > Please describe the tests that you ran to verify your changes. Also list any relevant details for your test configuration. > Delete anything that is not relevant - [x] Manual - [ ] JUnit - [ ] Jest - [ ] Cypress ## Checklist: #### Dev activity - [x] My code follows the style guidelines of this project - [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code - [x] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas - [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation - [x] My changes generate no new warnings - [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works - [ ] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes - [ ] PR is being merged under a feature flag #### QA activity: - [ ] [Speedbreak features](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#speedbreakers-) have been covered - [ ] Test plan covers all impacted features and [areas of interest](https://github.com/appsmithorg/TestSmith/wiki/Guidelines-for-test-plans#areas-of-interest-) - [ ] Test plan has been peer reviewed by project stakeholders and other QA members - [ ] Manually tested functionality on DP - [ ] We had an implementation alignment call with stakeholders post QA Round 2 - [ ] Cypress test cases have been added and approved by SDET/manual QA - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after Cypress tests were reviewed - [ ] Added `Test Plan Approved` label after JUnit tests were reviewed <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit - **New Features** - Enhanced widget movement logic for improved layout management. - Introduced tracking for the number of items added to a section, optimizing layout adjustments. - **Refactor** - Updated widget movement and relationship management functions for better efficiency and clarity. - **Documentation** - Added explanatory comments in paste functionality for better understanding of the logic involved. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> |