This PR adds a new file "Application.tsx", which is analogous to the
existing Project.tsx file in that it contains the base layout for the
application page, as well as tabs pointing to sub pages. Currently, the
overview tab uses a paragraph with some fallback text, while the
connected instances table displays the instances table.
I have mostly copied the existing ApplicationEdit component and used
that as a base, assuming that we'll delete that component when we're
done with this.
<img width="1449" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/ac574a83-3cf4-4de5-a4de-188575074ecb">
This PR adds a first iteration of the connected instances table on a new
connected instances tab of the application page (hidden behind a flag).
As a first version, it only uses data that we currently return for each
application (so no "connected through" or "last synchronized").
It also uses the existing version of the application data and just
filters it for the "production" environment right now.
Adding query parameters (and potentially a new URL?) to the applications
page (to save state and fetch data) will be done in a follow-up. This
should lay the groundwork for adding a new API too.
<img width="1485" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/4fb68456-d0f5-4f82-9246-5333a273df9c">
## About the changes
This is a rough initial version as a PoC for a permission matrix.
This is only available after enabling the flag `userAccessUIEnabled`
that is set to true by default in local development.
The access was added to the users' admin page but could be embedded in
different contexts (e.g. when assigning a role to a user):
This is how the matrix looks like
---------
Co-authored-by: Nuno Góis <github@nunogois.com>
The current approach uses adds an extra parameter to the components and
passes it through from the parent components. It's never a lot of
levels, so it feels alright, but it's feels like a bit of a code smell.
I wonder if it would make sense to use a context for each change
request? 🤔
Supersedes: https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/pull/6181
This PR updates the way we show deleted strategies in the CR UI. Instead
of showing just the strategy name and a diff on hover, we show the same
strategy config as we do for new and updated strategies.
This makes it easier to see what you have deleted.
In doing so, it also fixes two issues:
1. inconsistent border radius for segment changes listed. Due to an
override in `frontend/src/themes/theme.ts`, these would get a border
radius of `theme.shape.borderRadiusLarge` instead of
`theme.shape.borderRadiusMedium`. It does this by adding a class and
making the selector more specific.
2. The background was unset for the strategy rollout box and constraint
item boxes.
It looks like this:
<img width="728" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/7cba28ac-0454-444d-8cfa-f46543ccf2dc">
<img width="728" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/832be653-3def-4afc-b72f-36fcd76ad83d">
Or with more kinds of strategies:
<img width="454" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/f18e5482-7d2e-4cbd-8177-9de6dfb10307">
Note: I'm happy to isolate the color changes to a separate PR if that's
preferable.
This PR adds showing of env variant conflicts in change requests.
This is a simple solution that only compares the total state of
variants. We *could* potentially do a modified version where we show
each and every variant as its own property. Because variants have to be
unique by name and because their names can't be changed after their
creation, we could create a map of variant name to their data.
<img width="1105" alt="image"
src="https://github.com/Unleash/unleash/assets/17786332/0c67f958-6c4e-453a-9791-0e132fb1f23e">
This PR adds an endpoint to Unleash that accepts an error message and
option error stack and logs it as an error. This allows us to leverage
errors in logs observability to catch UI errors consistently.
Considered a test, but this endpoint only accepts and logs input, so I'm
not sure how useful it would be.
React can sometimes be non-intuitive and behave erratically due to the
way it detects changes in hook dependencies.
This prevents infinite re-renders from `useIncomingWebhooks` by using a
static `DEFAULT_DATA` constant, so that its reference is always the
same, so no changes are detected when there are none.
Unrelated scouting, but this PR also removes an unneeded dependency in
the memoized columns in `ProjectActionsTable`.
Adds a new Inactive Users list component to admin/users for easier cleanup of users that are counted as inactive: No sign of activity (logins or api token usage) in the last 180 days.
---------
Co-authored-by: David Leek <david@getunleash.io>
Use React's context to track how many CRs are moved into their next
state with conflicts present.
This PR wraps environment change requests and change request overviews
in a change request plausible context that contains a
`willOverwriteStrategyChanges` property. This property is updated by the
diff calculation if there are any conflicts and then read by the
`changeState` function in the `useChangeRequestApi` hook.
As long as at least one of the strategies in the CR contain conflicts,
it will be marked as overwriting changes.
We had to make some updates to let the compiler know about the types and
fix an issue with nested objects not being compared as objects (instead
as strings), but this saves us a few lines and is hopefully more
readable.
The `FeatureToggleListTable` is nested directly within `PageContent`.
`PageContent` was cause for removing the skeleton from the table.
However, this is unnecessary because the table has its own loader that
manages the skeletons. Therefore, `PageContent` does not require a
loader.
This PR adds a 'change-request-conflict-created' event whenever someone
save a strategy update for a strategy that's used in either pending or
scheduled change requests.
Data for pending change requests will only be sent if change requests
are enabled. Data for scheduled change requests will be sent regardless.
Getting this data is somewhat involved, so I've extracted as much of the
logic into a separate file as possible.
The event re-uses the existing `change_request` metric and sends the
following data for each change request that we discover conflicts on:
```ts
{
state: ChangeRequestState,
changeRequest: string, // <unleash identifier>#<change request id>
action: 'edit-strategy',
eventType: 'conflict-created'
}
```
There's only one action for this for now, but we could expand this event
to things such as strategy deletion, feature archival, in the future.
That said, I'd be happy to take it out.
## Discussion points
### Has the strategy actually been updated?
This does not check whether a strategy has actually changed before
emitting the event, only that you save your strategy changes.
This assumes that most people will simply close the modal by
clicking/tapping outside it or using the escape key instead of pressing
save.
However, it will likely lead to some false positives. If we think that
is an issue, I would suggest adding a check that something in the
strategy has actually changed in a follow-up PR.
