Clone firewall rule

[benjaminleonard]

Fixes #2063 inspired by #2067.

Much cleaner compared to that approach since we use defaultValues and don't need to set anything on the form directly after its been initialised.

Cherry picked the route param commits from #2249

[vercel]

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name	Status	Preview	Updated (UTC)
console	✅ Ready (Inspect)	Visit Preview	Jul 16, 2024 5:26pm

[just-be-dev]

Clever! (👋)

[benjaminleonard]

Come back!

[david-crespo]

Love this and it is wonderfully clean. I have some tweaks to make and I'll add an e2e test too. My only issue is "New similar rule" — tolerable for sure but maybe we can do better. I see the difficulty here because you want to convey both of these things at once:

1. It's using the existing rule as a starting point, but you can edit it
2. It only opens the form, it does not actually create anything right off

So 2 rules out the usual words like "copy" or "duplicate". I wonder if "clone" has more of a templatey connotation.

• Clone and edit
• Copy and edit
• Use as template

All kind of weird. Use as template isn't bad. Could we have a tooltip on a non-disabled button saying "Create a new rule using this one as a template"? Is that disgusting?

[david-crespo]

We could do a random 3 digit number or something to combat that.

[david-crespo]

Ugh these conflicts are not cool!

[david-crespo]

@charliepark and I talked the button copy question to death and landed on Clone by itself. We decided the user uncertainty the first time about whether it creates it directly is tolerable because in the worst case, it creates an identical rule and you can just delete it. And of course we don't actually do that, we just open the form. Copy doesn't work because it suggests something more like copy/paste and we have the Copy ID button right above that actually does mean that.

[david-crespo]

We decided to go with adding -copy to the copied rule's name instead of a number. We will fix #2220 for v10, so it is fine.