This PR contains two small UI improvements for the new project creation
form:
1. Wrap the action buttons when necessary (so that they don't become
unavailable when the window gets narrow enough.)
2. Make the change request table scrollable horizontally, so that it can
still be configured on narrow windows.
---------
Co-authored-by: sjaanus <sellinjaanus@gmail.com>
This PR addresses several related fixes to the new project creation
dialog to prevent unnecessary growing and shifting:
- use a fixed width for the guidance sidebar
- use a fixed height for the guidance code snippet
- use a fixed height for the mobile guidance
- use a fixed width for the mode selector button
- cap description height
This is a little tricky because we don't want the changes for the dialog
to affect other forms. As such, I've added some new options you can use
when you create the guidance components / sidebar.
We are keeping the UI hidden for mdsol behind kill switch, but I feel
like we can remove the flag completely for backend, so everyone will
keep collecting data.
Co-authored-by: Gitar Bot <noreply@gitar.co>
## About the changes
This aligns us with the requirement of having ip in all events. After
tackling the enterprise part we will be able to make the ip field
mandatory here:
2c66a4ace4/src/lib/types/events.ts (L362)
We updated the website to include a new product page at
https://www.getunleash.io/enterprise-feature-management-platform. The
only product links in the docs are no longer relevant.
<!-- 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? -->
---------
Co-authored-by: Thomas Heartman <thomas@getunleash.io>
In preparation for v6, this PR removes usage and references to
`error.description` instead favoring `error.message` (as mentioned
#4380)
I found no references in the front end, so this might be (I believe it
to be) all the required changes.
<!-- 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. -->
Completing the docs updates to remove references of "feature toggle" to
become "feature flag".
This does not include links.
<!-- 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? -->
This PR is part of #4380 - Remove legacy `/api/feature` endpoint.
## About the changes
### Frontend
- Removes the useFeatures hook
- Removes the part of StrategyView that displays features using this
strategy (not been working since v4.4)
- Removes 2 unused features entries from routes
### Backend
- Removes the /api/admin/features endpoint
- Moves a couple of non-feature related tests (auth etc) to use
/admin/projects endpoint instead
- Removes a test that was directly related to the removed endpoint
- Moves a couple of tests to the projects/features endpoint
- Reworks some tests to fetch features from projects features endpoint
and strategies from project strategies
## About the changes
EdgeService is the only place where we use active tokens validation in
bulk. By switching to validating from the cache, we no longer need a
method to return all active tokens from the DB.
<!-- 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. -->
- update anchor link descriptions
- fix ordered lists across files
- formatting updates
<!-- 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? -->
<!-- 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. -->
We are making a round of updates to change all references of "feature
toggle" to "feature flag".
This is also under the assumption that "Create feature toggle" in the
product UI will become "creature feature flag".
There are also formatting improvements to the docs included in this PR.
> Note: This does not include anchors and links for now.
## Discussion points
<!-- Anything about the PR you'd like to discuss before it gets merged?
Got any questions or doubts? -->
Relying on tags to trigger workflows makes it hard to trace what's
happening after a release, currently:
1. We manually trigger a release workflow
2. The release workflow executes and tags the new release in code
3. Several other workflows trigger after matching the tag doing
different things: build docker images, tarballs and other things.
This creates a loose dependency between the workflows which are actually
part of the same "release workflow" which makes it difficult to spot
when one or other dependent workflow fails because the dependency is
indirect through the tagging mechanism.
This PR switches to a more direct approach using [workflow
calls](https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/reusing-workflows).
This will create a graph as shown in the following graph:
making it easier to track and identify any problem.
The "drawback" of this approach is that previously we could trigger all
dependent workflows at once by creating a tag matching the expected
pattern without manually triggering a new release. This limitation can
be overcome by adding a manual workflow_dispatch to the workflows using
the tag trigger.
We talked with @nunogois that this test is testing migration from 2023,
but time has passed and the migration is working properly, so we think
to cut down on test run time, we can remove it.
