Add support for dynamic forms in helm install and upgrade

[rohitkrai03]

Fixes:

• https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-4083
• https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-3061

Depends on: #5789

Analysis / Root cause: We have YAML editor as default editor for values in Helm install and upgrade form. We need to support dynamic form generation if the helm chart has a value.schema.json present.

Solution Description: Once we have the custom formik fields to handle dynamic forms and toggle between form and yaml editor without loosing context, we need to use that to add support for synced editor in helm install and upgrade form.

Screen shots / Gifs for design review:
Helm Install -

Helm Upgrade -

Browser conformance:

• Chrome
• Firefox
• Safari
• Edge

[rohitkrai03]

/retest

[rohitkrai03]

/hold

This PR depends on components being added in #5789.

[rohitkrai03]

/hold cancel

[rohitkrai03]

/retest

[rohitkrai03]

/retest

[rohitkrai03]

/retest

[parvathyvr]

@rohitkrai03 Since we have the Form and YAML view now,The message shown under 'Install Helm Chart' heading has changed.The message displayed changes based on the view shown.
Both the messages for Form view and YAML view can found in this High level design doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/1PCCE8rh1_URGVhaBYBYsGO9ghwwsGAec80XK53FJfvs/edit#heading=h.647eyup2doth
Also the message shown for Upgrade form will have to change.I will work on those messages and update in my final design document.Thanks!

[christianvogt]

@rohitkrai03 is it possible to keep the expanded state of the form view when switching between form or yaml?

[rohitkrai03]

@rohitkrai03 is it possible to keep the expanded state of the form view when switching between form or yaml?

@christianvogt Don't think it's possible to maintain that state, it's handled by DynamicForm component and the templates that it's using. I'll look into it and see if somehow we can do something.

[andrewballantyne]

@rohitkrai03 There may be something lost here... The "Root Schema" feels weird:

Would we not want to auto-expand the first level of the schema to avoid the collapsed block?

[rohitkrai03]

@rohitkrai03 There may be something lost here... The "Root Schema" feels weird:

Would we not want to auto-expand the first level of the schema to avoid the collapsed block?

@andrewballantyne That actually depends on the schema provided by the chart. If any part of the schema has a title and description, the form will render it inside an ExpandCollapse. The current schema in the example Helm chart is not written properly and has title and description for root schema as well. That's why it shows in expand collapse section. The schema also has some schema errors. I plan to raise a PR to update that schema in Helm catalog. The gif above is using the custom schema that I created and not the schema that is coming from API. That's why you're seeing that difference.

[christianvogt]

Overall it seems to work well.

Very annoying that the form collapses when switching from yaml to form; discarding the previous expanded states. I think if this merges as is we should raise an issue to capture this request and discuss with UX.

cc @openshift/team-devconsole-ux

[serenamarie125]

This is looking great @rohitkrai03 ! Agree with the comment made by @christianvogt around remember expansion. Is this being handled differently for the operator backed services/operator OLM based forms?

[rohitkrai03]

This is looking great @rohitkrai03 ! Agree with the comment made by @christianvogt around remember expansion. Is this being handled differently for the operator backed services/operator OLM based forms?

@serenamarie125 Even OLM forms don't have a way to keep the expansion state while switching between form and yaml views. I can create a issue to look into this later.

[rohitkrai03]

@christianvogt @serenamarie125 Bug to track the issue - https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-4228

[christianvogt]

We should have dependencies on these these 2 packages in our package.json

[rohitkrai03]

json-schema is being used just for its JSONSchema6 type definition all over the console. Is it necessary to add it to package.json if only type definition is being used?

[rohitkrai03]

react-jsonschema-form has a dependency on ajv but it's probably better to make it a direct dependency for dev-console package.

[rohitkrai03]

Updated package.json with new dependencies.

[christianvogt]

/lgtm
/approve

[openshift-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt, parvathyvr, rohitkrai03

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• frontend/OWNERS [christianvogt]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment