I realized that, in an oversight, the form now shows and sends project
CR config, even if the new form isn't active. The API just ignores it if
it doesn't understand it, so it's not very harmful, but it's better if
we don't send it at all. This PR does that.
It does not actually test that change request info isn't included (but
it does test ID inclusion). This is because:
- change request info is only included if we're enterprise. The rendered
version of the hook isn't by default.
- Setting up module mocking and making it work seems like a lot of work
for a small gain, considering we're probably going to be removing the
old form anyway.
- I've tested it locally.
Also adds some testing for the hook related to name validation and
payload creation
At first, I was creating a new component, Project Banner, which was 90%
of the old banner and 10% new code, but it did not feel right. The
current banner is actually smart enough to be used in any container. So
now, I have moved the outdated SDK banner to the project level.
I like the simplicity of the change.
## About the changes
We've identified that Bearer token middleware is not working for
/enterprise instance.
Looking at a few lines below:
88e3b1b79e/src/lib/app.ts (L81-L84)
we can see that we were missing the basePath in the use definition.
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
Adding our YouTube link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hq1g9QyPw14
<img width="731" alt="Screenshot 2024-05-15 at 7 46 12 AM"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/22972707/32c0e9e5-931d-40ad-9f23-a110d2ae3fb8">
## About the changes
Current state, when returning the HTML entry point from the server,
there are no headers attached. We encountered an issue with a deployment
and this had an impact for us.
A brief description:
1. We deployed the most recent version. Noticed an unrelated issue.
2. Users tried to use the most recent version and due to their client
cache, requested assets that did not exist in the newest version.
3. Our cache layer cached the assets that were not there with the HTML
response. It had to infer the type based on the filename because there
was no attached `Content-Type` header. This cache was very sticky.
4. After rolling back we saw the HTML response (from the cache) instead
of the appropriate response from the upstream Unleash application.
This PR does a few things.
1. When responding with the HTML entry point, it adds header
(`Content-Type: text/html`).
2. When the client is requesting an asset (a path that ends with an
extension), it also instructs the resource not to be cached
(`Cache-Control: no-cache`) and returns a 404. This will prevent misses
from getting cached.
## Discussion points
To me, there doesn't seem to be a lot of test infra on serving the SPA
application. If that is an error, please indicate where that is and an
appropriate test can be added.
<!-- Thanks for creating a PR! To make it easier for reviewers and
everyone else to understand what your changes relate to, please add some
relevant content to the headings below. Feel free to ignore or delete
sections that you don't think are relevant. Thank you! ❤️ -->
## About the changes
<!-- Describe the changes introduced. What are they and why are they
being introduced? Feel free to also add screenshots or steps to view the
changes if they're visual. -->
<!-- Does it close an issue? Multiple? -->
Closes #
<!-- (For internal contributors): Does it relate to an issue on public
roadmap? -->
<!--
Relates to [roadmap](https://github.com/orgs/Unleash/projects/10) item:
#
-->
### Important files
<!-- PRs can contain a lot of changes, but not all changes are equally
important. Where should a reviewer start looking to get an overview of
the changes? Are any files particularly important? -->
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
Updates according to our revision doc for our horizontal content pieces.
Instead of using the `required` attribute, we manually make it
required. This is indicated visually by red error text if the value is
empty (or whitespace only). To indicate to screen readers that it is
required, we add the `aria-required` attribute.
We didn't previously validate if the name
was whitespace only.
Also: if no envs are selected, indicate that all will be included
This prevents this form value from ever being invalid.
Adds a postgres_version gauge to allow us to see postgres_version in
prometheus and to post it upstream when version checking. Depends on
https://github.com/bricks-software/version-function/pull/20 to be merged
first to ensure our version-function doesn't crash when given the
postgres-version data.
It seems the code that was copied was copied from before we changed
the validation logic, so it wouldn't submit. This fixes that to remove
any ID validation in the new form.
