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

Media Library #554

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 8, 2017
Merged

Media Library #554

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 8, 2017

Conversation

erquhart
Copy link
Contributor

@erquhart erquhart commented Aug 25, 2017

The media library UI is feature complete. Here are the remaining steps:

  • remove temporary "media" widget and convert image/field widgets to use media library
  • implement support for asset provider integrations
  • add support for in-memory test backend
  • ensure asset filenames are lowercased
  • add media library support for markdown editor
  • migrate netlify-auth support to git-gateway (rebase to 0.5.0-beta branch)

Note that the media library will be in place for the editorial workflow, but will not be subject to the editorial workflow process.

Closes #350.
Closes #494.
Closes #229.
Closes #247.

@erquhart erquhart changed the title WIP - Add Media Library WIP - Media Library Aug 25, 2017
@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 5 times, most recently from b30abd7 to 6727267 Compare August 31, 2017 02:40
@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 4 times, most recently from 91effe5 to fde75b9 Compare September 8, 2017 04:44
@dopry
Copy link
Contributor

dopry commented Sep 12, 2017

I've got a rebased version of this at https://github.com/dopry/netlify-cms/tree/media-library-ui, you can grab it or cherry pick from there as you need. I'd send a PR, but my branch is based on master and won't merge.

  1. There is a bug with uploads, see dopry@37456b1

The workflow for inserting images is a little convoluted, not sure if there is a good way to streamline, but figured I'd write up some of my notes. some of it we may want to hoist up into #350, unless its something easily fixed in the PR.

  • Redundant steps when adding an existing image to an entry

    1. click +
    2. click image (Insert Image dialog pops up)
    3. click in dialog to open media library (media library dialog pops up)
    4. select image in media library
    5. click insert (media library dialog closes)
    6. click insert (Insert Image dialog closes)

    Note that steps 2,3 and 5,6 are redundant.

  • You have to specifically check the box to insert media. Its a small hit target, it might be better if clicking the row selected the checkbox.

  • it would be really cool if just dropping an image on the text editor would upload a piece of content, and insert an image box.

  • can't just paste a URL in the image widget.

@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 3 times, most recently from e54e371 to a7444e3 Compare September 19, 2017 13:52
@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

@dopry just saw your feedback, great stuff! I'll look into the upload bug and selection by clicking rows, the rest is probably going to happen under the UI refresh as the redundancies are bigger than just the media library.

@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 3 times, most recently from 646c1d5 to 1542f42 Compare October 10, 2017 14:59
@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 2 times, most recently from 5fa530e to fb6e36d Compare October 20, 2017 22:19
@erquhart erquhart changed the title WIP - Media Library Media Library Oct 20, 2017
@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Benaiah @tech4him1 @talves this is ready to rock. I went ahead and squashed, too many commits to be super useful anyway. I left the temporary live backend in the example config for review purposes, we'll need to revert that before merging.

@Benaiah
Copy link
Contributor

Benaiah commented Oct 20, 2017

@erquhart 🙌 awesome! I'll get to reviewing.

Copy link
Contributor

@tech4him1 tech4him1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There seems to be a regression here related to the routing changes -- I can no longer create a new post.

const slug = ownProps.match.params.slug;
const collection = collections.get(ownProps.match.params.name);
const newEntry = ownProps.newRecord === true;
const newEntry = ownProps.match.newRecord === true;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This should be reverted, this is breaking new entry creation.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed - thanks for finding that.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 1, 2017

ALRIGHT ITS REALLY READY FOR REAL NOW GUYS

@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 3 times, most recently from 11ead33 to 8a091e1 Compare November 3, 2017 03:37
@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 3, 2017

Note: ignore code style issues unless they're catastrophic. Didn't have the luxury of doing it clean, but improvements will probably come with the UI work prior to 1.0. Gotta get this puppy released.

The original work is still the first commit, the rest is split into separate commits to ease review for anyone that already went over that whopping first commit.

If you haven't reviewed that first commit, it might be simpler to just review on file changes, since a fair amount from the original commit gets changed/removed.

Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's a few stylistic decisions that break the linter, but in most of those cases the lint rule is unnecessary or wrong IMO (there's a lot of "don't use a naked single argument for an arrow function with braces" which I think is silly), and you specifically stated we're de-emphasizing style on this PR (:+1: from me on that). Just noting here that this doesn't pass our linter, which IMO we should change by either fixing the linter or moving to prettier (at some point).

99% of this LGTM - great job. There's a couple things that seem a little weird to me, but nothing major and I haven't noticed any regressions. I'll approve to allow merge, since I think it's fine to do so to get this out the door, but I do have comments for @erquhart below.

package.json Outdated
@@ -124,8 +125,10 @@
"webpack-postcss-tools": "^1.1.1"
},
"dependencies": {
"bytes": "^2.5.0",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It doesn't look like this dependency is being used in the final diff - should this be removed?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep, table view leftover, good catch.

return { id: response.sha, name: value, size: fileObj.size, url, path: trimStart(path, '/') };
}
catch(error) {
console.error(error);
Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah Nov 7, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems inappropriate to handle and log this error here, which prevents it from going up the Promise chain and being handled in a user-friendly manner. Is this try...catch block just for debugging?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Need to re-throw - try/catch is the new then/catch, since async await is written in a synchronous manner. If we just let the error go we'll lose the stack, an issue that we can maybe mitigate if we overhaul error handling at some point. The approach for now is to log the stack trace and then re-throw so it travels up, as you mentioned.

Will fix.

Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah Nov 7, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@erquhart maybe I'm wrong, but my understanding is that uncaught exceptions in an async function return a promise rejection rather than erroring synchronously. Because of this, a try...catch that just rethrows the error is redundant IIUC.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@erquhart erquhart Nov 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's totally redundant, but it let's us get the stack trace at the source. I haven't found a better way, at least with the way we handle errors now (haphazardly), to ensure we get an accurate trace.

Each instance of this pattern came out of me troubleshooting something and not getting the stack trace I needed with an error, didn't do it across the board. Moving forward we definitely need to solidify our approach to error handling, along with migrating over to async/await in general.

* Use `baseCommit` as the parent of the first commit, and normalize
* commit data to ensure it's not nested in `commit.commit`.
*/
const parent = this.normalizeCommit(idx === 0 ? baseCommit : newParent);
Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah Nov 7, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This ternary could be eliminated by changing the base value of the reduce to Promise.resolve(baseCommit) and then changing this line to const parent = this.normalizeCommit(newParent);.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Beautiful, done.

* Sometimes the list of commits for a pull request isn't updated
* immediately after the PR branch is patched. If the branch is known to
* have been updated very recently, `assertHead` will be appended, but
* only if the last commit in the response is the parent of `assertHead`.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🎉 💯 great way to leverage Git immutability to detect API weirdness.

* have been updated very recently, `assertHead` will be appended, but
* only if the last commit in the response is the parent of `assertHead`.
*/
const missingHead = assertHead && assertHead.parents[0].sha === last(prCommits).sha;
Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah Nov 7, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

assertHead implies to me that the function will error if I pass assertHead and neither it nor its parent(s) matches the most recent SHA. Instead, getPullRequestCommits silently continues, which seems prone to mishap - if the repo moves out from under us we probably don't want to blindly continue our mutations. OTOH, I can see people using assertHead without making mutations, who don't want an error here. A good fix IMO would be to separate this into two different methods - getPullRequestCommits (with no assertHead parameter) and assertHead (which does the conditional concatenation, and can have its errors caught and handled separately from API or HTTP errors) - which would allow the caller to decide how to handle it on a case-by-case basis, and simplify the related functions. (the equivalent to what this does now would be getPullRequestCommits(prNumber).then(commits => assertHead(commits, head).catch(() => commits)), which IMO expresses the intent much more clearly, eliminates a confusing argument from getPullRequestCommits, and makes what should be the most common desired behavior of assertHead (erroring when mutating a repo which has state we didn't expect) the default.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yep, I'm with that.

/**
* Upload a file.
*/
handlePersist = async event => {
Copy link
Contributor

@Benaiah Benaiah Nov 7, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Didn't know you could use async with a naked argument in an arrow function - cool!

@tech4him1 tech4him1 self-requested a review November 7, 2017 02:39
@tech4him1
Copy link
Contributor

This might be for a second-level (after merge) fix, but I wish there was a way so that we didn't have to download the entire full-resolution images when viewing the media library, or at least download them async. If you had a large media library, this could really bog down your computer.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 7, 2017

@tech4him1 I've been thinking of, at some point, creating and uploading thumbnails to the metadata branch for this purpose, definitely agree.

@erquhart erquhart force-pushed the media-library-ui branch 3 times, most recently from 4dd1bf7 to 52906d9 Compare November 7, 2017 21:33
Copy link
Contributor

@tech4him1 tech4him1 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A little inconsistent naming here -- was it intentional?

<span className="nc-fileControl-message" onClick={this.handleClick}>
{fileName ? fileName : 'Click here to upload a file from your computer, or drag and drop a file directly into this box'}
{fileName ? fileName : 'Click here to select an asset from the asset library'}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here we call it the asset library.

<span className="nc-fileControl-message" onClick={this.handleClick}>
{imageName ? imageName : 'Click here to upload an image from your computer, or drag and drop a file directly into this box'}
{fileName ? fileName : 'Click here to select an image from the image library'}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Here we call it the image library.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 8, 2017

@tech4him1 the media library can show all assets, or just images. The image control uses this to ensure non-images aren't available for selection in the image widget, and the messaging is tweaked accordingly.

@tech4him1
Copy link
Contributor

@erquhart Awesome, that's what I was hoping, just wanted to check.

Copy link
Collaborator

@talves talves left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

image
When adding a media file with the same name, it appears twice in the ui.

@talves
Copy link
Collaborator

talves commented Nov 8, 2017

@erquhart I was testing out the local api against this code to make the necessary method calls, when I saw the above. So, I tested on the preview deploy against the pr-554-backend and saw the same happen.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 8, 2017

@talves good catch - we're faking it to reduce API calls, but we need a way to check for this. Can you open a separate issue for it?

@talves
Copy link
Collaborator

talves commented Nov 8, 2017

#783

* rebase editorial workflow pull requests when behind

* fix async/await transpilation

* add media library pagination

* switch media library to grid layout

* ensure that only cms branches can be force updated
@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 8, 2017

Yarn is having issues, going to hold off on merging until their resolved.

@hacknug
Copy link

hacknug commented Nov 8, 2017

Talking about the naming inconsistencies you were discussing earlier, if this PR title is "Media Library" (and most instances in the code use that same term) why not go with Click here to select an image from the media library and Click here to select an asset from the media library instead of repeating the filtered keyword.

I think even something like Click here to select an image from the library would be better since "select an image" already implies you're allowing the user to only pick image files from the media library.

@erquhart
Copy link
Contributor Author

erquhart commented Nov 8, 2017

@hacknug yeah, we need to have more considered verbiage around this, agreed. I'm about to merge this (finally!!), but if you open a separate issue we can discuss from there.

@erquhart erquhart merged commit 6b45a46 into master Nov 8, 2017
@erquhart erquhart deleted the media-library-ui branch November 8, 2017 20:00
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.

None yet

6 participants