Operation slot machine #2301
Draft
Operation slot machine #2301
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
zspencer
force-pushed
the
operation-slot-machine
branch
from
5b2a42c to
c8b7267
Compare
We talked a bit at ensemble and Ana made the astute observation that the complexity of how Gizmos work using hand-wrolled single table inheritance is probably the biggest drag on development right now. So we're starting to untangle that by building up a way to `Slot` in `Gizmos` like the `Marketplace` or a `TextBlock` without the baggage of `Furniture`'s single-table-inheritance. Going forward, each `Gizmo` will need it's own `Model` and table for storing data; as we will eventually ditch the `furnitures` table completely.
We decided that instead of creating a `Slot`, we want to create Gizmos directly, and we want to make those `Gizmo` by sending users to the actual `/new` page for the particular `Gizmo`. We're thinking we will make the UI cards of Gizmos, so that they can include things like why you might want to add that Gizmo, or the help docs or the ... whatever. We don't know. It'll be fine.
zspencer
force-pushed
the
operation-slot-machine
branch
from
2e0dcd4 to
8c6ef8d
Compare
zspencer
force-pushed
the
operation-slot-machine
branch
from
ac283bc to
5f6a10e
Compare
|
If I'm understanding the notes in the PR description correctly, the underlying issue that @rosschapman was running into was the STI-iness of MarkdownBlock. This could be improved by migrating MarkdownBlock to be a Gizmo based on its own table, and not using the shared There is an adjacent, but separate, issue around improving how we (re)order Gizmos. After Ross' introduction of the positioning gem, it feels like a good next step in this direction would be to remove the RankedModel gem altogether. (Writing this down because Ross and I were just discussing next steps on this.) |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
@rosschapman ran into a weird bug when
ActionTexting theMarkdownTextBlockwhere the action text couldn't save itself. Basically we were using nested attributes with a faux-relationship; which meant the actualMarktdownTextBlockwas not getting saved.@anaulin pointed out that this is an example of the single-table-inheritance being annoying, and that maybe we should finally deal with the cruft and blurry lines from our initial
Furnitureimplementation.So we started down the path of a refactor where we make a
Slotresponsible for where in a particularSectionaGizmoshould live; and whichGizmoshould live in that spot.So we wrote a System Spec, and then we started implementing it and realized we had gone down the wrong pathyway, we want to create the
Gizmofirst and then add theSlot!So we're going to reset and move forward with making a
Cardfor eachGizmo!Sections#editpage so that our newGizmomanagement interface is a collection ofCardComponentsthat link to the particularGizmo's#newpage.