feat(components): [el-message] config-provider message max attr

[btea]

Please make sure these boxes are checked before submitting your PR, thank you!

• Make sure you follow contributing guide English | (中文 | Español | Français).
• Make sure you are merging your commits to dev branch.
• Add some descriptions and refer to relative issues for your PR.

feat #4868

[github-actions]

[jw-foss]

Left a couple comments for you to check, thanks.

[emojiiii]

I think we should discuss how to deal(discard/queue) with redundant messages if the maximum is exceeded @btea @JeremyWuuuuu

[btea]

IMO, redundant message should be discarded. If multiple messages are placed in the queue and pop up one by one, the user may switch to other pages, but the code logic is still popping up messages one after another, which will cause confusion.

[emojiiii]

IMO, redundant message should be discarded. If multiple messages are placed in the queue and pop up one by one, the user may switch to other pages, but the code logic is still popping up messages one after another, which will cause confusion.

But if they are discarded, some important information may be lost?

[btea]

IMO, redundant message should be discarded. If multiple messages are placed in the queue and pop up one by one, the user may switch to other pages, but the code logic is still popping up messages one after another, which will cause confusion.

But if they are discarded, some important information may be lost?

I think it depends on the user. If the user thinks the information is important, he can not set the max, or he can set the max a little larger.

[emojiiii]

can you test when you use two config-provide and different max ? @btea

[btea]

Generally, only one config-provider will be used. If there are more than one, the latter will overwrite the former, and the other configurations are the same.

[emojiiii]

You're right. If you can add another unit test for this, it will be very robust

[btea]

Do you mean to add multiple config-provider and then set different max values?

[emojiiii]

Do you mean to add multiple config-provider and then set different max values?

yes

[btea]

Maybe it is better to modify the value of config directly like in the test code?

[emojiiii]

Maybe it is better to modify the value of config directly like in the test code?

I'm just worried about whether multiple config-provider can merge configuration items as expected

[btea]

Okay, I will add unit test about this.

[jw-foss]

Maybe it is better to modify the value of config directly like in the test code?

I'm just worried about whether multiple config-provider can merge configuration items as expected

IMHO, multiple provider is made by the developer, so that it is at their choice to make the call, so that we cannot handle this because they did what they did, that was completely on their own, so that we can just ignore it. Because the specialty about these global items (as designed this way) they should be able to accept that. Or maybe later we can try to pass the context to the call so that we can get the app context.

[jw-foss]

LGTM