Milestone 0.2.0: Experience Builder-rendered nodes

This builds on top of 🌱 Milestone 0.1.0: Experience Builder Demo Active , so marking this . That doesn't mean we're not working on this already: work is already happening and being coordinated in 🌱 [META] Early phase back-end work coordination Active — with some of the issues in there being necessary for 🌱 Milestone 0.1.0: Experience Builder Demo Active .

(If there wasn't a hard DrupalCon Barcelona deadline, 🌱 Milestone 0.1.0: Experience Builder Demo Active and this milestone/issue would probably be one and the same.)

🌱 Milestone 0.1.0: Experience Builder Demo Active is nearly done. DrupalCon Barcelona 2024 is in a few days.

Time to get this fleshed out!

Also: do we want to keep using 🌱 [META] Early phase front-end work coordination Active + 🌱 [META] Early phase back-end work coordination Active ?

Some markup changes to improve clarity/scannability.

Initial issue for product requirement 19. Modify the page template created: 📌 Introduce an XB `PageTemplate` config entity Active .

Let me know if you want/need anything in SDDS for this next milestone as well as for DrupalCon Singapore.

Overhaul of the meta to reflect which of the 10 requirements are actionable, and to what extent. 9 of the 10 cannot begin UI+UX (aka client side) work due to designs not being ready.

Updated the status for and .

📌 HTTP API to read+write PageTemplate and Pattern config entities Active landed!

For 2.1. Content editing of meta fields, a new issue was identified as blocking the 0.2 milestone: 📌 [later phase] [RESEARCH] How to identify all meta fields for an arbitrary content entity? Active .

Finished adding 🟢, 🟡 or 🔴 to every ⮑.

Also clarified why the two stretch goals are pretty firmly out of reach already at this stage.

Removed the stretch goals from the list. We're not currently working on them so there's no realistic plan of them getting done by early January.

Also descoped (with confirmation from @lauriii) revisions and Workspaces from 0.2.0.

The Purpose and Expected result sections are incomplete. They don't capture the entirety of the remaining items that are in the Requirements section. When I find a bit of time, I'll fill in those sections so that they add clarity as to what the overarching goal of the 0.2.0 milestone is.

Updated the proof-of-concept issue for the component code editor from 📌 [exploratory] StackBlitz PoC Active to ✨ [exploratory] PoC of Preact+Tailwind components editable via CodeMirror or Monaco Active .

I updated the "Content editing of meta fields" section with 0.2.0 scope vs 0.3.0 scope.

I'm retitling this issue from 0.2.0 to 0.3.0, and changing its target date from mid January to late February.

In the meantime, we'll release a 0.2.0 on or before Jan. 13, so that the Drupal CMS 1.0 release on Jan. 15 can reference a tagged release of XB. I'll open a separate issue for that; it won't include all of the scope of this one.

Here's the one for 0.2.0: 🌱 Milestone 0.2.0: the one for Drupal CMS 1.0 Active

Updated the 19. Modify the page template (i.e. global sections) requirement. It's working, but there's 3 currently known rough edges:

1. Assigned to: jessebaker 🐛 Empty global regions add unnecessary spacing to preview Active
2. 🐛 If an autosave entry exists before enabling global regions for a theme, theme regions cannot be seen Active
3. Assigned to: balintbrews ✨ Focus mode for global regions Active , blocked on Assigned to: parthbcharya ✨ Show page information in top bar Active

re "Save (draft) content:"

we already have

and a Publish button to trigger a real entity save:

but I guessing what we want for 0.3.0 is the "Publish all" and we will remove the individual entity save button.

@effulgentsia if that is correct I will add the issues that get use to "Publish all" to the summary

4th rough edge for #32.

what we want for 0.3.0 is the "Publish all" and we will remove the individual entity save button

Correct. I updated the corresponding text in the IS, but yeah, if you could update the corresponding issue list, that would help a lot, thanks!

I updated the IS to change other occurrences of 0.2.0 in the summary to 0.3.0.

With drupal.org's CSS, I'm finding the nested list hard to read. So I updated the IS to use <h3> headings for each high level capability instead.

@effulgentsia Did you intentionally delete

• Finish Media Library integration for 1. Adding components (built for 0.1):
  ⮑ 📌 Media Library dialog styling Active

?

I did, because I thought it wasn't time yet to be tracking general "fix broken stuff" issues here yet. But I just now restored it under a new "Miscellaneous high priority fixes" heading.

Updated the 29. Layout patterns (i.e. sections) requirement.

(And also updated 19. Modify the page template's issue list — lots of activity over there this week.)

One more for 19. Modify the page template, that was created a few hours ago!

Add anchors to facilitate deeplinking.

Not wanting to take the time right now to figure out how to best organize these within the issue summary, but the following issues are still needed as part of "Place Blocks as Components":

• 📌 [Needs design] Library confusingly lists SDC-sourced and Block-sourced Components together Active
• 📌 Implement saving block settings forms Active

I wonder if we should turn each of the top-level requirements, such as "Place Blocks as Components", into their own Plan issue, so that we can make those the parent of individual issues like the above.

I wonder if we should turn each of the top-level requirements, such as "Place Blocks as Components", into their own Plan issue, so that we can make those the parent of the above issues and similar individual issues for the other top-level requirements.

-1 — too much overhead and issue queue noise. I'd rather have a single issue with >200 updates than having to monitor half a dozen issues, each of which causes actual MR issues to be somewhat obscured.

Updated 5. Place blocks as components — included everything @effulgentsia listed in #44 and expanded.

✨ [PP-1] Integrate saving sections with the backend Postponed just landed, which means 29. Layout patterns is AFAICT the first requirement to be completely done! 🥳

Added issue for the "Save (draft) content" section. I am still looking for more issues to add

In addition to 📌 [PP-1] Send page data to Drupal for storage in auto-save store Postponed: needs info being under the "Save (draft) content" requirement, it's also the last remaining item for "Content editing of meta fields", so landing it would give us another nice green checkmark in front of a top-level requirement.

🌱 [META] Pages Active is still listed in the IS under "Content editing of meta fields" but the remaining children of that are being tracked separately under that meta and don't need to block this issue.

Finished going through issue queue for 6. Save (draft) content section

I think we are close but we mind unknown issues once ✨ [PP-1] Implement the "Publish All" button Postponed is completed as they will allow use to do the whole process. For this to include entity fields we will need the 2.1. Content editing of meta fields section to be done too

As far as know is 🐛 Some components cannot be used in XB because UI prevents SDC props being named `name` Active isn't required for 0.3.0

As far as know is 🐛 Some components cannot be used in XB because UI prevents SDC props being named `name` Active isn't required for 0.3.0

Yeah, that issue and its children should be moved in the IS from the "save content" requirement to the "blocks" requirement. It's possible that the entirety of that isn't required for 0.3.0, but the parts that are blocking 📌 Implement saving block settings forms Active are.

Thanks, @tedbow! Updated that 6. Save (draft) section section to follow the same structure as the others (BE/FE/E2E/Polish). Some were miscategorized. Some icons were off. But I kept the same set of issues.

Thanks, that really helped!

And now adding + removing issues to that same section.

Added:

• 📌 Save metadata(page data) field with the entity revision Active
• 📌 Create an endpoint to publish all auto-saved entities Active
• 📌 Create AutoSave service and HTTP API to retrieve all entities with pending changes Active
• ✨ Save page data form values in application state with support for undo/redo Active

Removed (given my understanding of Lauri's original product requirements, but I was not in every meeting while working at limited capacity during paternity leave, so correct me if I'm wrong 🙏):

• 📌 [later phase] Support matching `{type: array, …}` prop shapes Postponed — we should absolutely do this and it is a stable blocker, but this was never intended to be solved as part of this
• 📌 Add typed value-objects for the component tree structure Needs review — definitely never intended to be solved as part of this

Moved 📌 [PP-2] Don't store page template model data in auto-save for an entity Postponed to for "Save (draft) content", and added a placeholder for the missing validation error support.

Also marked both "Save (draft) content" and "Modify the page template (i.e. global regions)" as 🟢 — but not yet ✅: I have high confidence we'll be able to wrap those up given the current status + pace + outlook, but they're not yet done.

Fixed formatting and added jumplinks.

@Wim Leers re #54 ok. yeah I reread the issue in 📌 [PP-2] Don't store page template model data in auto-save for an entity Postponed . I missed this part

The values are filtered out in \Drupal\experience_builder\Controller\ClientServerConversionTrait::clientModelToServerProps but we are storing more in the autosave/tempstore than we need to.

I thought there would be conflict in "Publish All" phase because each entity could have its own copy of the global regions that could conflict. Now I see it is just extra data we don't actually use. So +1 on moving it to "Polish" section

Introducing an explicit to allow identifying which things are known to be needed in the future, but explicitly omitted from the 0.3 scope.

Discussing this with @effulgentsia and @lauriii. To enable @lauriii to specify which polish he considers necessary for meeting the product requirements, I need to:

1. clearly distinguish between must-have (all the "foundations" bits), should-have (the "polish for long-term API stability" aka avoid technical debt) and nice-to-have ("polish for later phase")
2. I should first order the should-have lists by what I perceive to be priority order; this enables @lauriii to either confirm or ask for changes

This update to the issue summary only does the first bit.

#59.2 — pass 1 of N.

#59.2 — pass 2 of N.

#59.2 — pass 3 of 3.

Still outstanding:

1. Reconciling the should-haves for 6. Save (draft) content with those of 5. Place blocks as components — both are impacted by/need changes to the data model. I still need to dig deeper to be able to articulate which falls in which bucket.
2. 23. Component creation via code editor: actual implementation work has only truly begun last week. See the plan at 🌱 [Meta] Plan for code components Active , which @balintbrews crafted. Pinged him to ask about must-have/should-have/nice-to-have breakdown, because that meta doesn't currently specify.
3. 2.1. Content editing of meta fields needs clarification from @effulgentsia on whether it's essentially done by virtue of having the Page content entity type plus a working 6. Save (draft) content. (I was on paternity leave and working limited capacity, I was in none of the meetings.)

At this time, there's nothing more I can do. Hopefully updates on the remaining pieces in the next 24 hours.

Increasing the priority for following issues:

1. 📌 [Needs design] Library confusingly lists SDC-sourced and Block-sourced Components together Active (nice to have to must have)
2. ✨ Layers panel should not show Regions that are empty Active (nice to have to should have)

Added following issues to the list:

1. 🐛 'false' appears in Page Title when deleting all characters Active
2. 📌 Create back link in XB Active
3. ✨ Provide a way to create a new page Active
4. ✨ SEO settings for Pages Active
5. ✨ Open navigation modal by clicking on page title in XB navigation Postponed

Increasing the priority for following issues:

You didn't actually — you only added those new issues. Made it so!

I'm surprised 📌 The pending changes API endpoint should list individual regions for global template changes Active isn't on here (for 6. Save (draft) content).

But AFAICT 📌 Consider refactoring page_template into page_region(s) Active is now likely to be the successor to that, but it'd fall under 19. Modify the page template (i.e. global regions). Tentatively adding it to "should-have", but I have a hunch that even though unplanned, @lauriii would now in hindsight mark this as "must-have" — so added it there.

Adding 📌 Implement saving block settings forms Active .

Adding 🐛 Adding the Image component results in a state considered invalid Active since it's a critical bug.

Adding follow up issues from Global Regions MR

Added ✨ Polish flow for Publish all changes" when receiving conflict errors in response Active to SHOULD-HAVE for 6. Save (draft) content

Lots has happened. Update some status emojis.

Per #3497543-40: Milestone 0.2.0: the one for Drupal CMS 1.1 → , we ended up not tagging a 0.2.0 release for inclusion in Drupal CMS. Therefore, this issue can go back to using that number.

We expect to tag the 0.2.0 release by the end of the week (which is also the end of the month), assuming we can wrap up these issues → by then.

All 🌱 [Meta] Plan for code components Active must-haves are done! 🤯🥳

Plus, the long-standing 📌 [Needs design] Library confusingly lists SDC-sourced and Block-sourced Components together Active finally landed too, which empowers a much nicer UX for landing

must-haves listed in this meta are done now, so marked each of the 7 requirements as ✅.

Adding:

1. 🐛 The sorting logic works only when elements are listed vertically Active
2. 🐛 Dragging components within a slot breaks drag and drop Active

It's live: https://www.drupal.org/project/experience_builder/releases/0.2.0-alpha1 →

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.

I started writing up 🌱 Milestone 1.0.0-beta1: Start creating non-throwaway sites Active . Note that that summary is very much a work in progress. Half the issues there probably don't really need to block a beta and possibly 80% of the stuff that we do want to get into the beta milestone isn't yet on that list. But hey, it's a start. Hopefully it will start resembling a proper roadmap within the next few weeks.