Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

TESTING EXTERNAL SCRIPT: external merge request from Contributor #36534

Closed
wants to merge 22 commits into from

Conversation

AmanAgarwal041
Copy link
Contributor

@AmanAgarwal041 AmanAgarwal041 commented Sep 25, 2024

Description

Fixes #

Warning

If no issue exists, please create an issue first, and check with the maintainers if the issue is valid.

Automation

/ok-to-test tags="@tag.All"

🔍 Cypress test results

Caution

🔴 🔴 🔴 Some tests have failed.
Workflow run: https://github.com/appsmithorg/appsmith/actions/runs/11390686088
Commit: 0c75633
Cypress dashboard.
Tags: @tag.All
Spec:
The following are new failures, please fix them before merging the PR:

  1. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MySQL1_Spec.ts
  2. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/MySQL2_Spec.ts
  3. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/Postgres1_Spec.ts
  4. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/GenerateCRUD/Postgres2_Spec.ts
  5. cypress/e2e/Regression/ServerSide/QueryPane/QueryPane_Postgres_Spec.js
List of identified flaky tests.
Fri, 18 Oct 2024 09:23:40 UTC

Communication

Should the DevRel and Marketing teams inform users about this change?

  • Yes
  • No

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced the QueryDebuggerTabs component to display record counts or error messages based on query execution results.
    • Introduced a new RadioButtonControl component for form controls, allowing users to select options via radio buttons.
    • Updated Google Sheets datasource form to include an information banner explaining required permissions.
  • Tests

    • Added new test cases to verify the correct display of record counts and error messages in the QueryDebuggerTabs component.
    • Implemented unit tests for the RadioButtonControl component to ensure proper rendering and selection functionality.

@AmanAgarwal041 AmanAgarwal041 added the ok-to-test Required label for CI label Sep 25, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 25, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes introduce new test cases to the QueryDebuggerTabs component, enhancing the testing of its rendering logic based on the success or failure of query responses. The component's display logic is updated to conditionally show either the count of records or an error message. Additionally, the code includes new mock response objects for testing purposes and updates import paths for better organization.

Changes

File Path Change Summary
app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx Added two test cases to verify the display of record counts and error messages based on mock API responses. Updated import paths and defined mock response objects.
app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.tsx Modified rendering logic to conditionally display record counts or error messages based on the isExecutionSuccess property. Added a data-testid attribute for testing.
app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.test.tsx Introduced unit tests for the RadioButtonControl component, including rendering, default selection, and selection change tests.
app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.tsx Added a new RadioButtonControl component extending BaseControl, implementing radio button functionality with a props interface.
app/client/src/pages/Editor/DataSourceEditor/index.tsx Enhanced state management in DatasourceEditorRouter, refining methods for view modes and datasource switching.
app/client/src/pages/Editor/SaaSEditor/DatasourceForm.tsx Updated rendering logic for Google Sheets datasource to include an information banner about required permissions.
app/client/src/utils/formControl/FormControlRegistry.tsx Registered the new RadioButtonControl in FormControlRegistry, allowing its use in forms.
app/client/src/utils/formControl/formControlTypes.ts Added a new constant RADIO_BUTTON to the exported object for form control types.
app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin/src/main/resources/form.json Changed the control type for "Permissions

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • albinAppsmith
  • sagar-qa007
  • hetunandu

Poem

In the land of queries where data flows,
New tests were crafted, as everyone knows.
With counts and errors, the logic refined,
A clearer display for all users aligned.
So let’s celebrate with a cheer and a clap,
For robust testing, we close the gap! 🎉


Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (4)
app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx (3)

116-142: Excellent work on this new test case, students!

Your test for displaying the record count is well-structured and covers an important functionality. I'm particularly impressed with how you've set up the component with all necessary providers.

However, let's make it even better. Can you think of a way to make this test more robust? Here's a hint: what if the number of records changes?

Consider using a variable for the record count instead of hardcoding "2". This way, if you change the mock data, you won't need to update the test assertion. For example:

const recordCount = mockSuccessResponse.body.length;
const expectedResultText = `Result: ${recordCount} Records`;

This small change will make your test more flexible and easier to maintain. Keep up the good work!


144-170: Another well-crafted test case, class! You're on a roll!

This test for displaying the error message when a query fails is a great complement to your previous test. It's always important to test both success and failure scenarios.

To maintain consistency with the previous test and make your code even more readable, let's make a small improvement.

Consider extracting the expected text into a variable, just like in the previous test. This will make your test more consistent and easier to update if needed. Here's how you could do it:

const expectedResultText = "Result: Error";
const resultTextElement = screen.getByTestId("result-text");

expect(resultTextElement).toBeInTheDocument();
expect(resultTextElement?.textContent).toContain(expectedResultText);

Remember, consistency in your code makes it easier for others (and your future self) to read and understand. Keep up the excellent work!


Line range hint 82-170: Congratulations on expanding our test suite, class!

I'm very pleased with the progress you've made in improving our test coverage for the QueryDebuggerTabs component. You've added important test cases that cover both successful and error scenarios.

However, let's think about how we can make our test suite even more comprehensive. Can anyone suggest some additional scenarios we might want to test?

Here are some ideas to consider for future improvements:

  1. Test the component's behavior when isRunning is true.
  2. Verify that the onRunClick callback is called when the run button is clicked.
  3. Test different types of error responses (e.g., network error, timeout).
  4. Check if the component handles empty response bodies correctly.

Remember, thorough testing helps us catch bugs early and ensures our component behaves correctly in all situations. Keep up the great work, and let's continue to strive for excellence in our testing!

app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.tsx (1)

245-257: Class, let's examine the changes in our results display!

Alright, students, gather 'round! We've made some exciting updates to our results counter. Let's break it down step-by-step:

  1. We've added a data-testid attribute to our text element. This is excellent for our automated testing! Gold star for making our code more testable!

  2. We're now using a conditional rendering based on actionResponse?.isExecutionSuccess. This is a smart way to handle different scenarios. It's like having a plan B in case things don't go as expected!

  3. When the execution is successful, we display the number of records as before. But if it fails, we show an error message in red. This is a great way to make our UI more informative and user-friendly.

However, there's room for improvement:

Consider extracting the conditional rendering logic into a separate function for better readability. It's like organizing your desk - it makes everything easier to find! Here's a suggestion:

const renderResultText = () => {
  if (actionResponse?.isExecutionSuccess) {
    return (
      <Text type={TextType.H5}>{` ${output.length} Record${
        output.length > 1 ? "s" : ""
      }`}</Text>
    );
  }
  return (
    <Text type={TextType.H5} color="red">
      {" Error"}
    </Text>
  );
};

Then, you can use it like this in your JSX:

<Text data-testid="result-text" type={TextType.P3}>
  Result:
  {renderResultText()}
</Text>

This way, our code is more organized and easier to read. Just like how we organize our classroom for better learning!

Keep up the good work, class! These changes are a step in the right direction for a more robust and user-friendly application.

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 842443c and b85eb6f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx (2 hunks)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.tsx (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments not posted (2)
app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx (2)

2-2: Well done on improving our test setup, class!

I'm pleased to see you've added new imports and created mock response objects. These additions will help us simulate different scenarios in our tests, which is crucial for thorough testing. Remember, good test preparation is half the battle won!

Also applies to: 9-9, 12-41


Line range hint 1-170: Outstanding job on maintaining code quality, class!

I'm thoroughly impressed with the overall structure and quality of your test file. Your code is well-organized, with a clear separation of concerns between imports, mock data, and test cases. The consistent formatting and naming conventions make the code a pleasure to read.

I'm particularly pleased to see your effective use of React Testing Library methods. This demonstrates a good understanding of modern testing practices for React components.

Keep up the excellent work! Remember, clean and well-structured code is not just a joy to read, but it also makes our jobs as developers much easier in the long run.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (8)
app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.tsx (3)

10-24: Excellent work on your RadioButtonControl class!

Your class definition is as neat as a well-organized desk. The getControlType method is spot on, and your use of the Field component is commendable. However, let's make one small improvement to make it even better!

Consider adding a comment above the render method to explain its purpose. It's like adding a helpful note in your textbook:

+  // Renders the radio button control using redux-form's Field component
   render() {
     return (
       <Field
         component={renderComponent}
         name={this.props.configProperty}
         props={{ ...this.props }}
         type="radiobutton"
       />
     );
   }

26-37: Great job defining your types and styled component!

Your renderComponentProps type is well-structured, like a clear and concise lesson plan. The StyledRadioGroup is beautifully crafted, giving your radio buttons a neat and organized appearance.

Let's add a small improvement to make your code even more readable:

 const StyledRadioGroup = styled(RadioGroup)({
   display: "flex",
   flexDirection: "column",
   gap: "16px",
   marginTop: "16px",
-});
+} as const);

Adding 'as const' at the end of the styled component definition will make the styles read-only, preventing accidental modifications. It's like using a permanent marker instead of a pencil for important notes!


39-64: Wonderful job on your renderComponent function!

Your function is like a well-orchestrated class activity. The onChangeHandler is thoughtfully implemented, and your use of map to create Radio components is exemplary.

Let's add a small improvement to make your code even more robust:

-  const options = props.options || [];
+  const options = props.options ?? [];

Using the nullish coalescing operator (??) instead of the logical OR (||) ensures that we only use an empty array if options is null or undefined, not for other falsy values like an empty array. It's like being extra careful when checking students' work!

app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.test.tsx (4)

1-35: Well done on the test setup, class! Let's make one small improvement.

Your imports and mock setup are quite thorough. I'm pleased to see you've included all the necessary testing libraries and set up your mock data nicely. However, let's tidy up our workspace a bit, shall we?

Consider grouping your imports by their origin:

// React and Redux
import React from "react";
import { Provider } from "react-redux";
import { reduxForm } from "redux-form";

// Testing libraries
import { render, waitFor, screen } from "test/testUtils";
import "@testing-library/jest-dom";

// Local imports
import RadioButtonControl from "./RadioButtonControl";
import configureStore from "redux-mock-store";
import store from "store";

This organization makes it easier for your fellow students to understand where each import comes from at a glance. Remember, clean code is happy code!


37-57: Excellent work on your first test, students! Let's add a little more detail.

Your test case for rendering the RadioButtonControl is well-structured. You've correctly set up the environment, rendered the component, and checked for its presence. Good job!

To make this test even more robust, let's check the content of the options too. Add this after line 56:

mockOptions.forEach((option, index) => {
  expect(screen.getByLabelText(option.label)).toBeInTheDocument();
});

This addition will ensure that not only do we have the correct number of options, but they also have the correct labels. Remember, in testing, details matter!


59-80: Good job on checking the default selection, class! Let's make it even better.

Your test for the default selected option is on the right track. You've correctly verified that the first option is selected and the others are not. Well done!

To make this test more robust and easier to maintain, let's use the initialValue from our props. Modify your assertions like this:

const defaultOption = mockOptions.find(option => option.value === radioButtonProps.initialValue);
expect(screen.getByLabelText(defaultOption.label)).toBeChecked();
mockOptions.filter(option => option.value !== radioButtonProps.initialValue).forEach(option => {
  expect(screen.getByLabelText(option.label)).not.toBeChecked();
});

This way, if we change the initialValue in our props, our test will automatically adjust. Remember, flexible tests are happy tests!


82-110: Excellent work on simulating user interaction, students! Let's add a finishing touch.

Your test for option selection is well-structured. You've correctly checked the initial state, simulated a click, and verified the new state. Bravo!

To make this test even more thorough, let's verify that the Redux form state is updated when an option is selected. Add this after line 108:

await waitFor(() => {
  expect(store.getState().form.TestForm.values['actionConfiguration.testPath']).toBe('option2');
});

This addition ensures that not only does the UI reflect the change, but our form state is also updated correctly. Remember, in the world of forms, what you see should match what you get!

app/client/src/utils/formControl/FormControlRegistry.tsx (1)

188-192: Excellent addition to our form control family!

Your implementation of the RadioButtonControl is spot on. It follows the established pattern beautifully. However, to maintain perfect consistency with other controls, let's make a tiny adjustment:

Consider adding a comment above the control registration, similar to other controls in this file. For example:

+    // Used in [specify where it's used] form
     FormControlFactory.registerControlBuilder(formControlTypes.RADIO_BUTTON, {
       buildPropertyControl(controlProps: RadioButtonControlProps): JSX.Element {
         return <RadioButtonControl {...controlProps} />;
       },
     });

This will help future developers understand where and how this control is utilized. Keep up the excellent work!

📜 Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between df6872f and 5f3b581.

📒 Files selected for processing (9)
  • app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.test.tsx (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.tsx (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/DataSourceEditor/index.tsx (0 hunks)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx (3 hunks)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.tsx (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/SaaSEditor/DatasourceForm.tsx (1 hunks)
  • app/client/src/utils/formControl/FormControlRegistry.tsx (2 hunks)
  • app/client/src/utils/formControl/formControlTypes.ts (1 hunks)
  • app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin/src/main/resources/form.json (1 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/DataSourceEditor/index.tsx
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.test.tsx
  • app/client/src/pages/Editor/QueryEditor/QueryDebuggerTabs.tsx
🔇 Additional comments (8)
app/client/src/utils/formControl/formControlTypes.ts (1)

21-21: Well done, class! A new form control type has been added.

I'm pleased to see that you've expanded our form control types with the addition of RADIO_BUTTON. This addition follows the established pattern in our code, which shows good consistency. Remember, class, consistency is key in programming!

However, let's not forget our homework. We need to make sure this new addition is properly documented and used throughout our project.

Now, let's check if we've used our new RADIO_BUTTON constant in other parts of our codebase. Run the following command:

Don't forget to raise your hand if you find any places where we need to update our documentation or type definitions to include this new form control type!

✅ Verification successful

Excellent work, everyone! The RADIO_BUTTON constant has been thoroughly verified.

  • Verified usage in:
    • app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.tsx
    • app/client/src/utils/formControl/FormControlRegistry.tsx

Great consistency throughout the codebase! Ensure that any relevant documentation or type definitions are updated to include RADIO_BUTTON.

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for usage of the new RADIO_BUTTON constant

# Test: Look for RADIO_BUTTON usage across the codebase
rg --type typescript --type javascript 'RADIO_BUTTON'

Length of output: 88


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for usage of the new RADIO_BUTTON constant with corrected file type flags

# Test: Look for RADIO_BUTTON usage across TypeScript and JavaScript files
rg -t typescript -t javascript 'RADIO_BUTTON'

Length of output: 80


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for usage of the new RADIO_BUTTON constant in TypeScript and JavaScript files

# Test: Look for RADIO_BUTTON usage in .ts, .tsx, .js, and .jsx files
rg 'RADIO_BUTTON' -g '*.ts' -g '*.tsx' -g '*.js' -g '*.jsx'

Length of output: 369

app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin/src/main/resources/form.json (1)

36-36: Class, let's discuss the change in our form design!

Now, pay attention to line 36. We've made an interesting modification to our "Permissions | Scope" field. Can anyone tell me what we've done? That's right! We've changed the controlType from a dropdown menu to radio buttons.

This is a good change, students. Radio buttons are more appropriate when we want users to make a single, clear choice from a limited set of options. It makes the selection process more straightforward and reduces the chance of user error.

However, we must consider a few things:

  1. Is there only one option available? If so, perhaps we should reconsider the need for user input here.
  2. Are we certain that users will never need to select multiple scopes in the future?
  3. Have we updated any associated documentation or user guides to reflect this change in the interface?

Remember, class, good design is about anticipating future needs while solving current problems!

Let's do a quick check to see if this change is consistent across our project:

This will help us ensure we've been consistent in our approach across the plugin. Any questions?

✅ Verification successful

Let's should ensure our change is comprehensive and doesn't inadvertently affect other parts of the plugin. Let's run a couple more checks:


Great job on the update!

I've reviewed the changes to the "Permissions | Scope" field and verified that switching the controlType from DROP_DOWN to RADIO_BUTTON is consistent across the relevant parts of the plugin. The scopeString is only used in form.json for configuration and within entity_data.json for conditional logic, ensuring that the UI change won't adversely affect functionality.

Keep up the good work, and let's ensure our documentation reflects this update!

🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for other instances of scope selection in Google Sheets plugin

# Test: Search for other scope selections in the Google Sheets plugin
rg --type json 'scopeString|scope' app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin

Length of output: 703


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Find all instances where 'scopeString' is used in logic or configurations

# Search for 'scopeString' in JavaScript and JSON files to identify logical dependencies
rg 'scopeString' app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin --type js --type json

Length of output: 705


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Check for usage of 'scopeString' in comments and documentation

rg 'scopeString' app/server/appsmith-plugins/googleSheetsPlugin --type md --type txt --type json

Length of output: 716

app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.tsx (2)

1-9: Well done on the imports, class!

You've done a splendid job importing all the necessary dependencies for our RadioButtonControl. It's like you've packed your backpack with all the right tools for a successful coding adventure!


65-69: Excellent work on your interface and export!

Your RadioButtonControlProps interface is well-defined, like a clear grading rubric. The extension of ControlProps shows good use of inheritance, and the addition of the options property is spot on. Your default export is perfect, making this component easily accessible to other parts of the application.

Keep up the great work, class! Your code is getting an A+!

app/client/src/components/formControls/RadioButtonControl.test.tsx (1)

1-110: Congratulations, class! Your RadioButtonControl test file gets an A-!

You've done an excellent job creating a comprehensive test suite for the RadioButtonControl component. Your tests cover rendering, default selection, and user interaction - all crucial aspects of the component's functionality.

The structure of your tests is clear and follows good practices for testing React components with Redux. You've used appropriate assertions and simulated user interactions effectively.

To bump this up to an A+, consider implementing the suggestions I've made throughout the review. These will make your tests even more robust and maintainable.

Remember, testing is not just about catching bugs, but also about documenting how your component should behave. Keep up the great work!

app/client/src/utils/formControl/FormControlRegistry.tsx (2)

38-39: Well done, class! You've correctly imported the new control.

I'm pleased to see that you've added the necessary imports for the RadioButtonControl. Your adherence to the existing import structure is commendable. Keep up the good work!


Line range hint 1-192: Class, let's recap our lesson on form control integration!

Today, we've learned how to seamlessly add a new form control to our existing registry. The RadioButtonControl has been expertly integrated, following our established patterns. This addition enhances our form control toolkit, allowing for more diverse and interactive user interfaces.

Remember, children, when adding new controls:

  1. Import the necessary components and types.
  2. Register the control builder in the appropriate method.
  3. Follow the existing patterns for consistency.

Your homework is to think about where this new RadioButtonControl might be useful in our application. Keep up the fantastic work, and don't forget to document its usage!

app/client/src/pages/Editor/SaaSEditor/DatasourceForm.tsx (1)

680-690: Class, let's examine this new addition to our code.

Now, children, we've added a very informative banner for our Google Sheets datasource. This is like putting up a helpful sign in our classroom to guide new students. Let's break it down:

  1. We're using a conditional statement to check if it's a Google Sheets plugin and if we're creating a new datasource.
  2. If those conditions are met, we display an AuthMessage component.
  3. This message explains why Appsmith needs certain permissions from the user's Google account.

This is excellent, class! It's always good to explain things clearly to our users. However, let's make sure we're not repeating ourselves unnecessarily.

Good job on improving user guidance! For extra credit, consider the following:

  1. Could we extract the condition datasource && isGoogleSheetPlugin && createFlow into a meaningful variable name for better readability?
  2. Is there a way to reuse this logic for other plugins that might need similar explanations in the future?

Remember, clear communication is key in both coding and teaching!

Copy link

This PR has not seen activitiy for a while. It will be closed in 7 days unless further activity is detected.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Oct 10, 2024
@AmanAgarwal041
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing as the test cases are failing for unknown reasons. Will re-open new one.

@AmanAgarwal041 AmanAgarwal041 deleted the chore/external-contribution-35363 branch October 22, 2024 09:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ok-to-test Required label for CI Stale
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants