# Introduction
Diff description: ~500 tests and +500 additions
close https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/731
## What has been done here
In a nutshell on a field metadata type ( `SELECT MULTI_SELECT` ) update,
we will be browsing all `ViewFilters` in a post hook searching for some
referencing related updated `fieldMetadata` select. In order to update
or delete the `viewFilter` depending on the associated mutations.
## How to test:
- Add FieldMetadata `SELECT | MULTI_SELECT` to an existing or a new
`objectMetadata`
- Create a filtered view on created `fieldMetadata` with any options you
would like
- Remove some options ( in the best of the world some that are selected
by the filter ) from the `fieldMetadata` settings page
- Go back to the filtered view, removed or updated options should have
been hydrated in the `displayValue` and the filtered data should make
sense
## All filtered options are deleted edge case
If an update implies that a viewFilter does not have any existing
related options anymore, then we remove the viewFilter
## Testing
```sh
PASS test/integration/metadata/suites/field-metadata/update-one-field-metadata-related-record.integration-spec.ts (27 s)
update-one-field-metadata-related-record
SELECT
✓ should delete related view filter if all select field options got deleted (2799 ms)
✓ should update related multi selected options view filter (1244 ms)
✓ should update related solo selected option view filter (1235 ms)
✓ should handle partial deletion of selected options in view filter (1210 ms)
✓ should handle reordering of options while maintaining view filter values (1487 ms)
✓ should handle no changes update of options while maintaining existing view filter values (1174 ms)
✓ should handle adding new options while maintaining existing view filter (1174 ms)
✓ should update display value with options label if less than 3 options are selected (1249 ms)
✓ should throw error if view filter value is not a stringified JSON array (1300 ms)
MULTI_SELECT
✓ should delete related view filter if all select field options got deleted (1127 ms)
✓ should update related multi selected options view filter (1215 ms)
✓ should update related solo selected option view filter (1404 ms)
✓ should handle partial deletion of selected options in view filter (1936 ms)
✓ should handle reordering of options while maintaining view filter values (1261 ms)
✓ should handle no changes update of options while maintaining existing view filter values (1831 ms)
✓ should handle adding new options while maintaining existing view filter (1610 ms)
✓ should update display value with options label if less than 3 options are selected (1889 ms)
✓ should throw error if view filter value is not a stringified JSON array (1365 ms)
Test Suites: 1 passed, 1 total
Tests: 18 passed, 18 total
Snapshots: 18 passed, 18 total
Time: 27.039 s
```
## Out of scope
- We should handle ViewFilter validation when extracting its definition
from the metadata
https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/1009
## Concerns
- Are we able through the api to update an RATING fieldMetadata ? ( if
yes than that's an issue and we should handle RATING the same way than
for SELECT and MULTI_SELECT )
- It's not possible to group a view from a MULTI_SELECT field
The above points create a double nor a triple "lecture" to the post hook
effect:
- ViewGroup -> only SELECT
- VIewFilter -> only SELECT || MULTI_SELECT
- Rating nothing
I think we should determine the scope of all of that
---------
Co-authored-by: Charles Bochet <charles@twenty.com>
# Introduction
In this PR we've migrated `twenty-shared` from a `vite` app
[libary-mode](https://vite.dev/guide/build#library-mode) to a
[preconstruct](https://preconstruct.tools/) "atomic" application ( in
the future would like to introduce preconstruct to handle of all our
atomic dependencies such as `twenty-emails` `twenty-ui` etc it will be
integrated at the monorepo's root directly, would be to invasive in the
first, starting incremental via `twenty-shared`)
For more information regarding the motivations please refer to nor:
- https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/587
-
https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/281#issuecomment-2630949682
close https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/589
close https://github.com/twentyhq/core-team-issues/issues/590
## How to test
In order to ease the review this PR will ship all the codegen at the
very end, the actual meaning full diff is `+2,411 −114`
In order to migrate existing dependent packages to `twenty-shared` multi
barrel new arch you need to run in local:
```sh
yarn tsx packages/twenty-shared/scripts/migrateFromSingleToMultiBarrelImport.ts && \
npx nx run-many -t lint --fix -p twenty-front twenty-ui twenty-server twenty-emails twenty-shared twenty-zapier
```
Note that `migrateFromSingleToMultiBarrelImport` is idempotent, it's atm
included in the PR but should not be merged. ( such as codegen will be
added before merging this script will be removed )
## Misc
- related opened issue preconstruct
https://github.com/preconstruct/preconstruct/issues/617
## Closed related PR
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/11028
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10993
- https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/pull/10960
## Upcoming enhancement: ( in others dedicated PRs )
- 1/ refactor generate barrel to export atomic module instead of `*`
- 2/ generate barrel own package with several files and tests
- 3/ Migration twenty-ui the same way
- 4/ Use `preconstruct` at monorepo global level
## Conclusion
As always any suggestions are welcomed !
This PR fixes a difficult to reproduce bug, where a race condition
appears if we go back to a table with view groups before the update
field metadata logic finishes its work.
In order to reproduce this bug on localhost, you'll have to simulate a
slow network in your browser.
The problem was that the view groups are initialized only once by
useLoadRecordIndexStates, in an effect component :
RecordIndexLoadBaseOnContextStoreEffect. And that this component as an
internal state loadedViewId, which prevents subsequent updates of view
groups by useLoadRecordIndexStates, because it considers that loading
already happened, even if it's actually stale data.
So instead of creating other states to burden the effect component with
complex state management, the solution was to add the only needed update
in a synchronous way directly in updateOneFieldMetadataItem logic. This
way we are sure that our boards and tables with view groups get updated
eventually, for each field metadata update, even if the requests take
time.
Fixes https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/10947
Fixes https://github.com/twentyhq/twenty/issues/10944
In this PR, I'm
- removing setting up the isAppWaitingForFreshMetadata boolean state in
PageChangeEffect navigate (not robust) to some precise synchronous
places, improving the control we have on when the app considers it's
ready to be rendered based on fresh metadata
- fixing tests
We were experiencing infinite loading on field settings pages (creation
of new field), due to the fact that the component was being rendered on
and on and on.
This was due to useGetCurrentUserQuery calls outside of the update
function, causing renders in cascade. We also had an issue with the
component being unmounted too often.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charles Bochet <charles@twenty.com>
## Context
The recent addition of object renaming introduced issues with enum
names. Enum names should follow the pattern
`${schemaName}.${tableName}_${columnName}_enum`. To address this, and to
allow users to customize the API name (which is included in the enum
name, columnName), this PR implements behavior similar to object
renaming by introducing a `isLabelSyncedWithName` boolean.
<img width="624" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-02 at 11 58 49"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/690fb71c-83f0-4922-80c0-946c92dacc30">
<img width="596" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-02 at 11 58 39"
src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/af9a0037-7cf5-40c3-9ed5-d51b340c8087">
This PR fixes several issues:
- enum naming should be: {tableName}_{fieldName}_enum and respecting the
case
- defaultValue format handled in the FE should respect the one in the BE
In my opinion we should refactor the defaultValue:
- we should respect backend format: "'myDefault'" for constant default
and "0" for float, "now" for expressions, "true" for booleans. we can
rename it to defaultValueExpression if it is more clear but we should
not maintain a parallel system
- we should deprecate option: isDefaultValue which is confusing
- we should re-work backend to have a more unified approach between
fields and avoid having if everywhere about select, multiselect, and
currency cases. one unified "computeDefaultValue" function should do the
job
What is still broken:
- currency default Value on creation. I think we should do the refactor
first
- select default value edition.
These cases do not break the schema but are ignored currently
