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

[core] Create a new package to share utils across X packages #13528

Merged
merged 17 commits into from
Jul 1, 2024

Conversation

flaviendelangle
Copy link
Member

@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle commented Jun 18, 2024

Discussions

For you, what should be the name of this package?

  • @mui/x-utils?
  • @mui/x-private-utils to make clear that it's not intended for external usage
  • something else?

Decision: @mui/x-internals

Other utils to migrate in follow up

@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle added the core Infrastructure work going on behind the scenes label Jun 18, 2024
@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle self-assigned this Jun 18, 2024
@@ -6,12 +6,12 @@ import {
} from '@mui/utils';
import useLazyRef from '@mui/utils/useLazyRef';
import useTimeout from '@mui/utils/useTimeout';
import { useResizeObserver } from '@mui/x-utils/useResizeObserver';
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I need this hook in #13520 so I think it's a good candidate to bootstrap the package and make sure it works.

@mui-bot
Copy link

mui-bot commented Jun 18, 2024

Deploy preview: https://deploy-preview-13528--material-ui-x.netlify.app/

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 49931a9

@@ -557,7 +557,6 @@
{ "name": "useGridSelector", "kind": "Variable" },
{ "name": "useGridVirtualization", "kind": "Function" },
{ "name": "useOnMount", "kind": "Function" },
{ "name": "useResizeObserver", "kind": "Function" },
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Was this export intented?
It was imported from @mui/x-data-grid/internals in the pro package so I guess it's was a mistake.
If it's intended, I can re-export it.
If it's not intended, I can re-export it and deprecate it so that we can remove it in the next major.

@cherniavskii

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it should be fine to remove it from the public exports 👍

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks 🙏
I'll merge this PR once 7.8.0 is out 👍

@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle marked this pull request as ready for review June 19, 2024 07:50
@github-actions github-actions bot added the PR: out-of-date The pull request has merge conflicts and can't be merged label Jun 19, 2024
Copy link

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the PR: out-of-date The pull request has merge conflicts and can't be merged label Jun 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldn't it be preferable to put the shared utils in the existing core utils package? This code looks like the kind of hooks we already have there.

Copy link
Member Author

@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle Jun 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

About the needs of an utility package that is specific to X:

We have been discussing the status of @mui/utils for years and I am reluctant to commit to much time on something that might change in the future (see this Notion page, we also have a Github issue that I failed to get my hand on.

For me the main goal here is to have an easy way to share code between the X components without entering the big discussions of "Should it be in @mui/utils? Should it be in @mui/base? Should it be in @mui/utils but X imports it from @mui/base? etc...
And to have it linked to our major cycle. If we start to add more complex utility functions (we were talking about drag & drop primitives or stuff around the data loading) I think it will become hard to have this code live in a package we do not own and with a major cycle we do not control.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I agree with @flaviendelangle here. With time, each project will drift apart, and @mui/utils goals will be different from @mui/x-utils, given its fuzzy nature.

Copy link
Member Author

@flaviendelangle flaviendelangle Jun 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

With that being said, I think it's interesting to discuss what we want to have in a shared codebase at the company level and why.

I think that the model where everything that might be useful company wide is in the core is not a great approach because it makes us second-class users of those tools which comes with several problems:

  • Major version synchronization
  • Feeling of ownership (we are less likely to go improve a piece of code in the core repo to make it compatible with React 19 for instance)
  • Complexity to add a utility function (we have to make sure the core releases it, we need to bump our version of @mui/utils, whereas here we just need to release all the X packages like we always do)
  • Dependent of the core internal structure (the discussion around where those utils should live highlights this, I don't think we should depend on the core product structure to decide where to import a util like useForkRef or useId)

But on the other hand, having some utils shared at the company level has the obvious benefit to avoid duplication which makes sure every package benefit from any improvement made to this utils.

My personal opinion is that, for topic that are related to the core like all the classes utilities, it make a lot of sense to consume them from a core package.
But for utils like the one listed in this PR (and even if I needed something like useForkRef and it did not exist), I don't think it's optimal.

@flaviendelangle
Copy link
Member Author

During Friday's X general meeting, we decided to go for @mui/x-internals to highlight the fact that this package is only for private stuff.

Copy link

This pull request has conflicts, please resolve those before we can evaluate the pull request.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the PR: out-of-date The pull request has merge conflicts and can't be merged label Jun 25, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the PR: out-of-date The pull request has merge conflicts and can't be merged label Jun 25, 2024
@@ -557,7 +557,6 @@
{ "name": "useGridSelector", "kind": "Variable" },
{ "name": "useGridVirtualization", "kind": "Function" },
{ "name": "useOnMount", "kind": "Function" },
{ "name": "useResizeObserver", "kind": "Function" },
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it should be fine to remove it from the public exports 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
core Infrastructure work going on behind the scenes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants