Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Starter page templates: correctly insert the pattern to the Content block #40583

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 12, 2024

Conversation

fushar
Copy link
Contributor

@fushar fushar commented Dec 12, 2024

Context: p1733852360016879-slack-CBTN58FTJ

Proposed changes:

In Gutenberg 19.8, we started defaulting to template-locked rendering mode when creating a new page with this PR:

This breaks the Starter Page Templates feature in wpcom at this line:

replaceInnerBlocks( postContentBlock ? postContentBlock.clientId : '', blocks, false );

because in template-locked mode, the blocks includes the template parts, so the post content block might be buried in the middle inside some Group blocks.

This PR fixes that by recursively finding the Content block.

Other information:

  • Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
  • Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
  • Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

  1. Prepare an Atomic site.
  2. Verify it's running Gutenberg 19.7.
  3. Patch this PR to Jetpack Beta Tester's WordPress.com Features.
  4. Activate TT5 theme.
  5. Go to Pages -> Add New Page.
  6. Verify you see the dotcom's Add a page modal.
  7. Select any pattern.
  8. Verify you can edit the pattern in the Editor afterwards.
  9. Now, download and install and activate Gutenberg 19.8 https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/releases/tag/v19.8.0
  10. Repeat the above steps and verify it still works.

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2024

Are you an Automattician? Please test your changes on all WordPress.com environments to help mitigate accidental explosions.

  • To test on WoA, go to the Plugins menu on a WordPress.com Simple site. Click on the "Upload" button and follow the upgrade flow to be able to upload, install, and activate the Jetpack Beta plugin. Once the plugin is active, go to Jetpack > Jetpack Beta, select your plugin, and enable the fix-starter-page-templates branch.

    • For jetpack-mu-wpcom changes, also add define( 'JETPACK_MU_WPCOM_LOAD_VIA_BETA_PLUGIN', true ); to your wp-config.php file.
  • To test on Simple, run the following command on your sandbox:

    bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack-mu-wpcom-plugin fix-starter-page-templates
    

Interested in more tips and information?

  • In your local development environment, use the jetpack rsync command to sync your changes to a WoA dev blog.
  • Read more about our development workflow here: PCYsg-eg0-p2
  • Figure out when your changes will be shipped to customers here: PCYsg-eg5-p2

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Dec 12, 2024

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

  • ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  • 🔴 Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
  • 🔴 Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
  • ✅ Add testing instructions.
  • ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  • ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖


The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.


Follow this PR Review Process:

  1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
  2. Choose a review path based on your changes:
    • A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
      • For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
      • Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
    • B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
      • For significant changes to core functionality.
      • Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
    • C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
      • For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
      • Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
  3. Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

@fushar fushar force-pushed the fix-starter-page-templates branch from 9bba275 to 1acb3d2 Compare December 12, 2024 04:26
@fushar fushar self-assigned this Dec 12, 2024
@fushar fushar marked this pull request as ready for review December 12, 2024 04:43
@fushar fushar requested review from a team, nightnei and mmtr December 12, 2024 04:44
@github-actions github-actions bot added the [Status] Needs Author Reply We would need you to make some changes or provide some more details about your PR. Thank you! label Dec 12, 2024
Copy link
Member

@mmtr mmtr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Lovely! Nice work @fushar

@fushar fushar merged commit 709e37f into trunk Dec 12, 2024
60 of 61 checks passed
@fushar fushar deleted the fix-starter-page-templates branch December 12, 2024 10:05
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the [Status] Needs Author Reply We would need you to make some changes or provide some more details about your PR. Thank you! label Dec 12, 2024
anomiex added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2024
anomiex added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2024
#40578 adjusted the eslint config and fixed existing errors, but #40583 snuck in just ahead of it adding a new instance of the error.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants