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

fix: avoid changing url when removing filters #1530

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2024

Conversation

DanielVZ96
Copy link
Contributor

Description

When clearing filters the library authoring page redirects to the first tab that was navigated to. Here's a video for lack of a better explanation:

https://www.loom.com/share/355e907bb767476a8d50c434233bcd23?sid=5349e45e-fe07-4c1d-9d75-f2126cf3fee2

This PR does two things:

  • Makes the Active Tab Key independent from the URL, except for the initial load, where the active tab is set from the url.
  • Avoids unnecessarily changing SearchParams: Due to a limitation of the useSearchParams react hook, which uses a memoized value for the URL that becomes stale after selecting a tab, it unexpectedly changes the URL value. Unfortunately there's no way to completely avoid this, so if there's a usageKey url param, the hook setter function will be called and the URL will revert to the stale memoized url.

Supporting information

Issue: #1524
Private-Ref: https://tasks.opencraft.com/browse/FAL-3971

Testing instructions

(Follow the video above)

  1. Navigate to a library
  2. Change the tab to components
  3. Filter by type
  4. Reset the filters
  5. Assert that you are still in the components tab

@DanielVZ96 DanielVZ96 requested a review from a team as a code owner November 23, 2024 02:11
@openedx-webhooks
Copy link

Thanks for the pull request, @DanielVZ96!

What's next?

Please work through the following steps to get your changes ready for engineering review:

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.

🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads

🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

🔘 Let us know that your PR is ready for review:

Who will review my changes?

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/2u-tnl. Tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for review.

Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Nov 23, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 23, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Please upload report for BASE (master@bc8d59b). Learn more about missing BASE report.
Report is 14 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master    #1530   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage          ?   92.91%           
=========================================
  Files             ?     1065           
  Lines             ?    20980           
  Branches          ?     4538           
=========================================
  Hits              ?    19494           
  Misses            ?     1413           
  Partials          ?       73           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@navinkarkera navinkarkera left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@DanielVZ96 Nice work figuring this out! Looks good to me, just have one suggestion which you can ignore if you don't agree.

We can modify the useStateWithUrlSearchParam hook to update the param only if it has changed like so:

      // If using the default paramValue, remove it from the search params.
      if (paramValue === defaultValue) {
        newSearchParams.delete(paramName);
      } else if (paramValue !== newSearchParams.get(paramName)){
        newSearchParams.set(paramName, paramValue);
      }

@DanielVZ96
Copy link
Contributor Author

DanielVZ96 commented Nov 26, 2024

@navinkarkera I also tried that and the issue is that once you enter that callback the URL is going to be reverted to the memoized one regardless of changes to the newSearchParams.

@navinkarkera
Copy link
Contributor

@DanielVZ96 It seems to work fine, i.e., preserves the tab on clearing filters. I might be missing something, how are you testing it?

@ChrisChV ChrisChV self-requested a review November 27, 2024 16:47
@DanielVZ96
Copy link
Contributor Author

@navinkarkera do you mean testing this branch, testing master, or testing the lines of code above?

@ChrisChV
Copy link
Contributor

ChrisChV commented Dec 6, 2024

I also tested #1530 (review), and doesn't work for me

Copy link
Contributor

@ChrisChV ChrisChV left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good

@ChrisChV ChrisChV merged commit 73490a5 into openedx:master Dec 6, 2024
7 checks passed
@ChrisChV ChrisChV deleted the dvz/fix-clear-filter-redirect branch December 6, 2024 21:24
DanielVZ96 added a commit to open-craft/frontend-app-authoring that referenced this pull request Dec 7, 2024
* Makes the Active Tab Key independent from the URL, except for the initial load, where the active tab is set from the url.
*Avoids unnecessarily changing SearchParams: Due to a limitation of the useSearchParams react hook, which uses a memoized value for the URL that becomes stale after selecting a tab, it unexpectedly changes the URL value. Unfortunately there's no way to completely avoid this, so if there's a usageKey url param, the hook setter function will be called and the URL will revert to the stale memoized url.
ChrisChV pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 9, 2024
* Makes the Active Tab Key independent from the URL, except for the initial load, where the active tab is set from the url.
*Avoids unnecessarily changing SearchParams: Due to a limitation of the useSearchParams react hook, which uses a memoized value for the URL that becomes stale after selecting a tab, it unexpectedly changes the URL value. Unfortunately there's no way to completely avoid this, so if there's a usageKey url param, the hook setter function will be called and the URL will revert to the stale memoized url.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants