Move add-on registry in its own package

[sneridagh]

This builds upon the typescript-support-in-core branch.

It moves the Volto add-on registry to its own package @plone/registry. It will allow to have the feature portable to other frameworks other than Volto itself. Internally, Volto uses it by path, so it does not relies on a released version.
It uses TypeScript, and an initial typing of the registry is in place already.

It also features the same treatment for the @plone/scripts use of i18n script.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for volto canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	d240400
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/volto/deploys/654614a95866ab00081a48cd

[cypress]

Passing run #7187 ↗︎

0	577	20	0	0
⚠️ You've recorded test results over your free plan limit. Upgrade your plan to view test results.

Details:

Merge branch 'typescript-support-in-core' into registryinownpackage
Project: Volto	Commit: 41ef1552a9
Status: Passed	Duration: 17:37 💡
Started: Sep 13, 2023 10:28 AM	Ended: Sep 13, 2023 10:46 AM

_{This comment has been generated by cypress-bot as a result of this project's GitHub integration settings.}

[davisagli]

@sneridagh What is the benefit of moving it? Won't it potentially cause issues with hoisting?

[sneridagh]

@davisagli World domination! ;) This will allow us to use the add-on registry somewhere else outside Volto. I'm experimenting with adding it to a NextJS build. I have a PoC already working :) It's quite promising.

[mtoepfl]

I`m going to test this branch with my mtoepfl-typescript branch.

In which I try to "merge" my work from last year sprint in Namur, where I type some basics like src/helpers/index.ts and first blocks like Title and Listing.

I put the types in extra .d.ts files where possible, so the "confusion" for none-typescript developers is minimal. Also if they shadow core-blocks and they are able to inherit from this types easily and extend it.

I`m looking forward for your feedback and to discuss this changes in person soon!

[mtoepfl]

I did a first review. Sorry for being nitpicking, but as I understood you asked me for feedback especially on typings.

As said, I will test it out. But in my opinion this type of utility can show the benifits of strong typing very well.

[mtoepfl]

FYI you can write this more readable as:

export type ComponentsConfig = Record<string, { component: React.ComponentType }>;

As far as I know, the used syntax is prefered if you extend this types with other attributes, eg.:

export type ComponentsConfig = {
   [key: string]: { component: React.ComponentType };
   name2: { component: Function; };
   name3: { component: string; };
};

[mtoepfl]

Another readability thingy, not needed twice:

blockSchema?: ({ props, intl }: { props: unknown; intl: unknown }) => object;

blockSchema?: (payload: { props: unknown; intl: unknown }) => object;

also Record<string, unkown> instead of object seams more explicit to me in this cases.

[sneridagh]

@mtoepfl I added your suggestions.

I also updated the latest updates from @plone/client in here. I'm foreseeing a new package @plone/types because we will need to share the types across packages outside Volto. For now it's easier to develop types where the action is happening (which I think is the client). We can postpone it until they are more "stable" for now it's fine to sync them from time to time.

@stevepiercy I've added a README here, based on other docs that we have and I made it "agnostic" not tied to Volto necessarily. Please take a look and sorry in advance, I did it quickly and might have lots of inconsistencies. I might have another look tomorrow. I would like to have this excerpt in here because I want the package to be self-explaining (eg. someone that comes out of the blue and must understand the capabilities of this package, being comprehensive enough for someone alien to Volto is paramount).

[stevepiercy]

Mostly English grammar and syntax, a few one sentence per line style things, and a few questions.

[stevepiercy]

This list is unused. What is the source? That should be fixed, too.

https://sourceforge.net/p/plone/mailman/plone-developers/

Suggested change

"email": "plone-developers@lists.sourceforge.net",

[sneridagh]

I saw this one in a lot of packages. Maybe we should bring it to the steering circle.

[stevepiercy]

Added to the agenda: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Iafw7MuTnG3l1j3fB1TbMgtADlhJGclSk7S8K0tTXeA/edit. If possible, can a merge be delayed until after the next meeting on Thu, Nov 2?

[stevepiercy]

I visited Alpha Centauri to the planning department, rappelled to the cellar with a headlamp, into the disused lavatory, pried opened the stuck file cabinet, fought off the leopard to view the display, then filed a complaint.

This one was overlooked, but it should not block merging. Instead I can open a new issue until we can bring it to the steering committee or we can make an executive decision for what should be the effective email address, if any.

[stevepiercy]

A couple more fixes, and it should be good to go. I also pushed up a few more words to ignore when running Vale for spell check.

[sneridagh]

“There’s no point in acting surprised about it. All the planning charts and demolition orders have been on display at your local planning department in Alpha Centauri for 50 of your Earth years, so you’ve had plenty of time to lodge any formal complaint and it’s far too late to start making a fuss about it now. … What do you mean you’ve never been to Alpha Centauri? Oh, for heaven’s sake, mankind, it’s only four light years away, you know. I’m sorry, but if you can’t be bothered to take an interest in local affairs, that’s your own lookout. Energize the demolition beams.”

― Douglas Adams, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Quoting master Adams, as nobody filled any complain :) I'm about to merge this one, starting the 18 alpha phase, continuing with our plans for world domination.

/cc @plone/volto-team