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

chore: restricting scheduled release UI #8506

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 5, 2025

Conversation

jordanl17
Copy link
Member

Description

With upcoming changes to the state machine, an ASAP release will briefly pass through the scheduling and scheduled states before moving to publishing and published.

The condition we reuse for determining whether to show the scheduled release UI elements (eg CTAs to schedule/unschedule) currently only checks on the state. This won't be enough when the above state machine change is made - ASAP releases will wrongly at times be shows as scheduled releases.

This change just restricts the condition, requiring that metadata.releaseType is scheduled first.

What to review

Does restricting the conditions for a scheduled release with a releaseType assertion make sense?

Testing

No regressions expected. Manually tested a few hot spots

Notes for release

Copy link

vercel bot commented Feb 5, 2025

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

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
page-building-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 5, 2025 11:31am
performance-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 5, 2025 11:31am
test-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Feb 5, 2025 11:31am
2 Skipped Deployments
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
studio-workshop ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Visit Preview Feb 5, 2025 11:31am
test-next-studio ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Feb 5, 2025 11:31am

…led - to support ASAP releases state machine changes
@jordanl17 jordanl17 force-pushed the chore/corel-restrict-to-scheduled-types branch from 8a8d832 to ccbd53f Compare February 5, 2025 11:23
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 5, 2025

No changes to documentation

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 5, 2025

Component Testing Report Updated Feb 5, 2025 11:33 AM (UTC)

❌ Failed Tests (1) -- expand for details
File Status Duration Passed Skipped Failed
comments/CommentInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 8s 15 0 0
formBuilder/ArrayInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 12s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Annotations.spec.tsx ❌ Failed (Inspect) 1m 20s 5 0 1
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPaste.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 52s 11 7 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPasteFields.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 12 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Decorators.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 26s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DisableFocusAndUnset.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 14s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DragAndDrop.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 28s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/FocusTracking.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 8s 15 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Input.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 32s 21 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/ObjectBlock.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 2m 4s 21 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/PresenceCursors.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 13s 3 9 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Styles.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 26s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Toolbar.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 44s 21 0 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditing.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditingNestedObjects.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Feb 5, 2025

⚡️ Editor Performance Report

Updated Wed, 05 Feb 2025 11:35:59 GMT

Benchmark reference
latency of sanity@latest
experiment
latency of this branch
Δ (%)
latency difference
article (title) 22.5 efps (45ms) 24.4 efps (41ms) -4ms (-7.9%)
article (body) 70.2 efps (14ms) 67.3 efps (15ms) +1ms (-/-%)
article (string inside object) 26.7 efps (38ms) 24.7 efps (41ms) +3ms (+8.0%)
article (string inside array) 22.7 efps (44ms) 21.3 efps (47ms) +3ms (+6.8%)
recipe (name) 48.8 efps (21ms) 50.0 efps (20ms) -1ms (-2.4%)
recipe (description) 52.6 efps (19ms) 55.6 efps (18ms) -1ms (-5.3%)
recipe (instructions) 99.9+ efps (5ms) 99.9+ efps (5ms) +0ms (-/-%)
synthetic (title) 18.7 efps (54ms) 18.9 efps (53ms) -1ms (-0.9%)
synthetic (string inside object) 18.9 efps (53ms) 19.6 efps (51ms) -2ms (-3.8%)

efps — editor "frames per second". The number of updates assumed to be possible within a second.

Derived from input latency. efps = 1000 / input_latency

Detailed information

🏠 Reference result

The performance result of sanity@latest

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 45ms 51ms 78ms 439ms 610ms 11.7s
article (body) 14ms 17ms 26ms 190ms 416ms 5.9s
article (string inside object) 38ms 42ms 50ms 296ms 357ms 7.0s
article (string inside array) 44ms 45ms 47ms 170ms 292ms 7.0s
recipe (name) 21ms 22ms 24ms 33ms 0ms 8.3s
recipe (description) 19ms 20ms 22ms 36ms 0ms 4.6s
recipe (instructions) 5ms 6ms 8ms 19ms 0ms 3.0s
synthetic (title) 54ms 60ms 69ms 281ms 1053ms 13.3s
synthetic (string inside object) 53ms 56ms 62ms 513ms 1456ms 8.9s

🧪 Experiment result

The performance result of this branch

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 41ms 52ms 69ms 434ms 726ms 10.1s
article (body) 15ms 18ms 51ms 256ms 352ms 5.3s
article (string inside object) 41ms 43ms 53ms 65ms 385ms 7.2s
article (string inside array) 47ms 50ms 58ms 252ms 351ms 7.7s
recipe (name) 20ms 21ms 24ms 40ms 0ms 8.2s
recipe (description) 18ms 19ms 20ms 29ms 0ms 4.5s
recipe (instructions) 5ms 6ms 7ms 23ms 0ms 3.0s
synthetic (title) 53ms 54ms 60ms 363ms 796ms 13.6s
synthetic (string inside object) 51ms 56ms 66ms 431ms 700ms 8.3s

📚 Glossary

column definitions

  • benchmark — the name of the test, e.g. "article", followed by the label of the field being measured, e.g. "(title)".
  • latency — the time between when a key was pressed and when it was rendered. derived from a set of samples. the median (p50) is shown to show the most common latency.
  • p75 — the 75th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 75% of the sampled inputs in this benchmark were processed faster than this value. this provides insight into the upper range of typical performance.
  • p90 — the 90th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 90% of the sampled inputs were faster than this. this metric helps identify slower interactions that occurred less frequently during the benchmark.
  • p99 — the 99th percentile of the input latency in the test run. only 1% of sampled inputs were slower than this. this represents the worst-case scenarios encountered during the benchmark, useful for identifying potential performance outliers.
  • blocking time — the total time during which the main thread was blocked, preventing user input and UI updates. this metric helps identify performance bottlenecks that may cause the interface to feel unresponsive.
  • test duration — how long the test run took to complete.

@jordanl17 jordanl17 marked this pull request as ready for review February 5, 2025 11:45
@jordanl17 jordanl17 requested a review from a team as a code owner February 5, 2025 11:45
@jordanl17 jordanl17 requested review from cngonzalez, RitaDias, bjoerge, juice49 and pedrobonamin and removed request for a team and cngonzalez February 5, 2025 11:45
Copy link
Contributor

@RitaDias RitaDias left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good catch!

@jordanl17 jordanl17 added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 5, 2025
Merged via the queue into next with commit af6e03a Feb 5, 2025
56 checks passed
@jordanl17 jordanl17 deleted the chore/corel-restrict-to-scheduled-types branch February 5, 2025 12:08
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants