Add package to store POCs and pull in experimental table

[fschade]

Description

Add a package to keep track and try out POCs inside web.
It also adds a first experimental table component which adds the ability to group rows.

Related Issue

• Needs export package members owncloud-design-system#2048
• Fixes Add grouping functionality for tables owncloud-design-system#1838

Motivation and Context

be able to showcase certain experimental features

How Has This Been Tested?

• local installation

Types of changes

• New Package

Checklist:

• Code changes
• Unit tests added
• Acceptance tests added

Open tasks:

• add tests
• release and link ODS
• feedback from @elizavetaRa & @diocas

[update-docs]

Thanks for opening this pull request! The maintainers of this repository would appreciate it if you would create a changelog item based on your changes.

[fschade]

@diocas & @elizavetaRa
can you please have a look if this fit your needs, you still have to manually import the experimental table,
but now web is able to create such components on it's own and does not need a custom ODS version anymore.

To do so please import and add the custom table component in the individual component:

...
import OcTable from 'web-pocs/src/components/OcTable/OcTable.vue'

export default {
  components: {
    OcTable
  },
  ...
}

please let me know if it's ok for you to do it manually,
as an alternative we could try to find a way to do it at build time... but then we have to discuss how we pull in the custom props which do not exist on the og table.

[diocas]

Our objective (which I think is aligned with oC management) is to drop forks on our side. I know we still need to compile ourselves (since we want some extra flags), but this solution means maintaining code (although small, so maybe acceptable for now).
But what I do not understand is the reluctance in making this table available to everyone. Before I though you didn't had it for lack of time to implement it, but if you implemented it, then what's the issue? Is it only the pagination (which you almost don't show now due to larger 'pages')? Or you plan to do it, but will keep it for a short period as experimental?

[diocas]

Also, is this implementation completely separate from all the normal tables? Since we might become the sole users of it, will its compatibility and functionality be assured for future updates?

[kulmann]

@diocas this PR is the minimal effort to get your code upstream (to reduce patch complexity on your side) - we can't afford to spend more time with it at the moment. The PR goes to web because we don't want to increase code complexity for the OcTable component and we don't want to expose it as public API in ODS. The code needs improvement (e.g. css classes from the ODS docs being used is a no-go, grouping selection doesn't belong in the table component, etc). Happy to iterate on this in a few weeks. For the time being I hope that this helps to keep your fork cleaner.

[diocas]

But can you clarify what are the future plans?
Will this be available in oCIS web upstream's sharing views as well? Will you, once you have more time, try to deduplicate some of this code? While we're not there, will you ensure it's properly kept in sync, functionality wise, with OcTable?

[fschade]

@diocas the plan is for sure to pull in the grouping into core. Right now too many topics are on the table and we though that could be a quick and handy way to support you in the meantime.

so if you’re fine with that and it works for you as a temporary solution please let me know. Then I cleanup ods leftovers and create some basic test for it.

regarding the general availability in the views, I cannot answer that question but would love to see it there as well.

[diocas]

I think it's better than the current situation, so let's do it for now.
What cleanups do you need to do?
I've tested the table yesterday and there were things broken (I've asked @elizavetaRa to have a look and give feedback.. It might be that I've just messed up when adding it in the code)

[fschade]

@diocas, @elizavetaRa i rebased master, no local ODS linking needed anymore.

[fschade]

@elizavetaRa have you looked into it in the meanwhile?
@diocas wanna get rid of ods jsdocs and add some testing.

[elizavetaRa]

@fschade We are using it locally already, I found some bugs, so I am doing some fixing & cleanup here #6748

[fschade]

@elizavetaRa thank you for the feedback, please let me know when your pr is ready for review :)

[diocas]

Hi @fschade, any update?

[fschade]

Hi @fschade, any update?

Today is my first day after vacation, i'll have a look.

[sonarcloud]

SonarCloud Quality Gate failed.   

2 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
2 Code Smells

0.0% Coverage
0.0% Duplication

[diocas]

@fschade since we still need to have a commit on our side adding this table, would you mind if we made it enabled via capability instead? (or, I don't know if possible/easy to do, maybe a compile flag?)

[fschade]

@diocas ill discuss this in a sec which way to go...
the bigger problem i have right now is that we're in the ocis beta phase right now and i think theres no time this week to finalize it.

Is it enough for you if we add it next week?

[fschade]

@diocas is it ok if we use a config option for that?

web/config/config.json.sample-ocis

Line 32 in 95edac2

"options": {

[diocas]

Yes, I wanted to say config option. No problem in doing it next week, but I'll see if we can push a PR with this option.

[kulmann]

@fschade could you rebase this PR and incorporate the config option options.cernFeatures?

[diocas]

@kulmann, @elizavetaRa opened a PR (#7005) with an enableAdvancedTable option and some fixes (the rebase is still necessary on this branch, though).

[diocas]

Hi @fschade , when can you merge Lisa's changes and merge this as well?
Btw, is this table up to date with the latest improvements to the files listing? I tried rebasing and things seemed a bit broken.

[diocas]

We've been keeping this code up to date. You can take if from this commit: cernbox@80af010d

[dschmidt]

Excuse me, wir haben 2022?!

Where does the yarn.lock file come from? I don't see it in master and we shouldn't readd it

[diocas]

Rebased with latest master from here: cernbox@2ccaafa

It also configures web to use it, with a configurable option (maybe with that we could put it out of PoCs and into the real thing?).

ping @fschade @dschmidt @kulmann

[pascalwengerter]

@kulmann I think this PR can be closed as superseded via #8443 ?

[kulmann]

as @pascalwengerter correctly pointed out:
closing as superseded via #8443