Block Bindings: Bootstrap sources defined in the server #63470
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
SantosGuillamot
added
[Type] Enhancement
|
Size Change: +307 B (+0.02%) Total Size: 1.75 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
SantosGuillamot
commented
Jul 12, 2024
|
Flaky tests detected in f8adadb. 🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/9908126207
|
Base automatically changed from
try/change-the-way-bindings-are-registered
to
trunk
July 16, 2024 10:05
SantosGuillamot
force-pushed
the
try/register-sources-from-the-server
branch
from
7df4050
to
0838beb
Compare
SantosGuillamot
requested review from
spacedmonkey,
ntwb,
nerrad and
ajitbohra
as code owners
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
gziolo
reviewed
Jul 16, 2024
| @@ -32,6 +32,11 @@ export default { | |||
| } ); | |||
| }, | |||
| canUserEditValue( { select, context, args } ) { | |||
| // Lock editing in query loop. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should it happen for all sources instead? On principle, do you think it should be never possible to edit values in the Query loop? What about the Comments block?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am not sure if it should happen in all the sources. I am thinking about pattern overrides, for example. Maybe you want to include a synced pattern there. To be honest, I don't have a strong opinion about what is the desired behavior. I just considered at that time that it was safer to lock it for post-meta until we figure out other use cases.
By the way, should we move this conversation to the original pull request where this was disabled: link? I don't know why after the rebase this change was included in the diff, but it doesn't belong to this pull request.
| /** | ||
| * Adds the block bindings sources registered in the server to the editor settings. | ||
| * | ||
| * This allows to bootstrap them in the editor. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Rather than "This allows to bootstrap them in the editor," this should probably read, "This allows them to be bootstrapped in the editor."
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Address in this commit 🙂
artemiomorales
approved these changes
Jul 17, 2024
SantosGuillamot
force-pushed
the
try/register-sources-from-the-server
branch
from
55929a0
to
50cfa09
Compare
gziolo
reviewed
Jul 22, 2024
|
Nice work moving that work forward 💯 We will still have to test it with 3rd party plugins to ensure it works the same depending on the unpredictable order of loading plugins. We experienced several issues related to that with block registration so it might happen here, too. In WordPress core we have predictable scenarios as sources get bootstrapped from the server always before they get registered. In case of plugins, they might get loaded before the bootstrapping for sources gets triggered. |
gziolo
reviewed
Jul 22, 2024
| case 'ADD_BOOTSTRAPPED_BLOCK_BINDINGS_SOURCE': | ||
| return { | ||
| ...state, | ||
| [ action.name ]: { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
See my #63470 (comment). I predict it’s the missing edge case to cover. In the case bootstrapping happens after registration, it would replace the entry with data from the server. A unit test would also help here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That makes sense. I'll work on a follow-up pull request to cover that use case.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have started this pull request trying to address this use case: link.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What?
This PR bootstraps the block bindings sources defined in the server so some of the properties are available without needing to register them in the client.
It follows a similar approach to
addBootstrappedBlockType.Why?
It reduces complexity for developers and let us reuse the server registration.
How?
addBootstrappedBlockBindingsSourceaction to initialize the server sources with the minimal information.bootstrapBlockBindingsSourcesFromServerthat receives the editor settings and bootstraps the sources.edit-siteandedit-postat the same time blocks and other block bindings sources are registered.Testing Instructions