Fix losing overrides after detaching patterns #58164
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
49 tasks
Mamaduka
reviewed
Jan 24, 2024
| await editor.selectBlocks( | ||
| editor.canvas.getByRole( 'document', { name: 'Block: Pattern' } ) | ||
| ); | ||
| await editor.showBlockToolbar(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should not be necessary; the clickBlockOptionsMenuItem will handle that.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I'm just including it for clarity. It's clearer for me this way that clickBlockOptionsMenuItem is interacting with the block toolbar, but not some other UI on the page. But yeah, I agree it's unnecessary and clickBlockOptionsMenuItem should be clear enough 😅.
|
Size Change: +36 B (0%) Total Size: 1.7 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
talldan
reviewed
Jan 24, 2024
| @@ -252,4 +252,49 @@ test.describe( 'Synced pattern', () => { | |||
| }, | |||
| ] ); | |||
| } ); | |||
|
|
|||
| // Check for regressions of https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/issues/26421. | |||
| test( 'allows conversion back to blocks when the reusable block has unsaved edits', async ( { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The original test tested when there are unsaved edits to the reusable block entity, which seems to be lost now in this new test, but I think is still a valuable test.
The new test is also valuable, but maybe it's worth also keeping the original and restoring it at some point rather than deleting it (it would have to be changed to use the 'Edit original' button to update the entity).
Given this new test is for overrides, is it worth moving it to the pattern-overrides file? Suggestion for a new test title:
Suggested change
| test( 'allows conversion back to blocks when the reusable block has unsaved edits', async ( { | |
| test( 'retains override values when converting a pattern block to regular blocks', async ( { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, right! Makes sense!
|
Flaky tests detected in 7eb5952. 🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/7636517303
|
talldan
approved these changes
Jan 24, 2024
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?
Fix #58122. Also migrated a test into Playwright.
Why?
Part of #53705.
How?
It's undecided whether we should keep the blocks'
ids andbindingsafter detaching, but at this stage I think it's easier to remove them all. We can add them back in a follow-up if needed.Testing Instructions
pattern with overrides and add it to a post.
Screenshots or screencast
Kapture.2024-01-24.at.14.44.45.mp4