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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[doc] Add a shape for adding the support of non synchronized tables #4269

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[doc] Add a shape for adding the support of non synchronized tables #4269

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jerome-obeo
Copy link
Contributor

Pull request template

General purpose

What is the main goal of this pull request?

  • Bug fixes
  • New features
  • Documentation
  • Cleanup
  • Tests
  • Build / releng

Project management

  • Has the pull request been added to the relevant project and milestone? (Only if you know that your work is part of a specific iteration such as the current one)
  • Have the priority: and pr: labels been added to the pull request? (In case of doubt, start with the labels priority: low and pr: to review later)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the pull request?
  • Have the relevant labels been added to the issues? (area:, difficulty:, type:)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the same project and milestone as the pull request?
  • Has the CHANGELOG.adoc been updated to reference the relevant issues?
  • Have the relevant API breaks been described in the CHANGELOG.adoc? (Including changes in the GraphQL API)
  • In case of a change with a visual impact, are there any screenshots in the CHANGELOG.adoc? For example in doc/screenshots/2022.5.0-my-new-feature.png

Architectural decision records (ADR)

  • Does the title of the commit contributing the ADR start with [doc]?
  • Are the ADRs mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Dependencies

  • Are the new / upgraded dependencies mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?
  • Are the new dependencies justified in the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Frontend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the frontend.

General purpose

  • Is the code properly tested? (Plain old JavaScript tests for business code and tests based on React Testing Library for the components)

Typing

We need to improve the typing of our code, as such, we require every contribution to come with proper TypeScript typing for both changes contributing new files and those modifying existing files.
Please ensure that the following statements are true for each file created or modified (this may require you to improve code outside of your contribution).

  • Variables have a proper type
  • Functions’ arguments have a proper type
  • Functions’ return type are specified
  • Hooks are properly typed:
    • useMutation<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useQuery<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useSubscription<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useMachine<CONTEXT_TYPE, EVENTS_TYPE>(…)
    • useState<STATE_TYPE>(…)
  • All components have a proper typing for their props
  • No useless optional chaining with ?. (if the GraphQL API specifies that a field cannot be null, do not treat it has potentially null for example)
  • Nullable values have a proper type (for example let diagram: Diagram | null = null;)

Backend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the backend.

General purpose

  • Are all the event handlers tested?
  • Are the event processor tested?
  • Is the business code (services) tested?
  • Are diagram layout changes tested?

Architecture

  • Are data structure classes properly separated from behavioral classes?
  • Are all the relevant fields final?
  • Is any data structure mutable? If so, please write a comment indicating why
  • Are behavioral classes either stateless or side effect free?

Review

How to test this PR?

Please describe here the various use cases to test this pull request

  • Has the Kiwi TCMS test suite been updated with tests for this contribution?

@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau added this to the 2025.1.0 milestone Dec 5, 2024
sbegaudeau
sbegaudeau requested changes Dec 5, 2024
View reviewed changes
doc/iterations/2025.1/add_support_of_non_synchronized_tables.adoc
== Problem

Currently, tables are synchronized regarding the semantic elements found in the model.
The table defines, inside its row description, what kind of elements the table handles and how they are retrieved.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Rows and columns should share the same capabilities. This shape should not be specific to rows.

doc/iterations/2025.1/add_support_of_non_synchronized_tables.adoc
Currently, tables are synchronized regarding the semantic elements found in the model.
The table defines, inside its row description, what kind of elements the table handles and how they are retrieved.
So currently, whenever a compatible element is created, it is automatically added as a new row of the table.
There is no way to create a table that does not follow this mechanism. +
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why the +?

doc/iterations/2025.1/add_support_of_non_synchronized_tables.adoc
== Key Result

As a specifier, I want to describe a table that is not synchronized. +
As a specifier, I want to define the drag & drop behavior that allows to add rows. +
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Technically, any operation should be able to add more rows. A drag and drop tool is convenient for this kind of interaction but an unsynchronized table could work without any drag and drop tools. Those are two separate subjects (synchronized and drag and drop tool)).

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not an issue in the shape to mix both concerns but when it will be time to implement it, create two issues and work on each task separately.

doc/iterations/2025.1/add_support_of_non_synchronized_tables.adoc

== Solution

Sirius-web will provide a `SynchronizationPolicy` in the `TableDescription` view model level that specifier could use.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The SynchronizationPolicy should probably exist on both ColumnDescription and RowDescription.

doc/iterations/2025.1/add_support_of_non_synchronized_tables.adoc

* Create the table representation
* Assuming we have a compatible element already created in the model
* Drag and drop such an element from the Explorer panel to the table representation
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Any kind of tool should be able to perform the addition of new rows / columns

@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau removed this from the 2025.1.0 milestone Dec 22, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau sbegaudeau requested changes

Requested changes must be addressed to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
pr: to review soon priority: high
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@jerome-obeo @sbegaudeau