feat(core): split right sidebar

[EYHN]

CleanShot.2024-03-01.at.11.44.25.mp4

Now each view has a general container, the yellow area is the general container part, and the green part is the routing specific part.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 23.80952% with 112 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 62.41%. Comparing base (e2a31ea) to head (c599715).

Files	Patch %	Lines
packages/frontend/core/src/utils/island.tsx	4.54%	21 Missing ⚠️
.../core/src/modules/right-sidebar/view/container.tsx	16.66%	15 Missing ⚠️
...rc/modules/right-sidebar/entities/right-sidebar.ts	0.00%	12 Missing ⚠️
...ore/src/modules/workbench/view/route-container.tsx	14.28%	12 Missing ⚠️
...e/src/modules/workbench/view/use-view-position.tsx	7.69%	12 Missing ⚠️
...ore/src/modules/right-sidebar/view/view-island.tsx	10.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
...core/src/modules/workbench/view/workbench-root.tsx	0.00%	9 Missing ⚠️
.../src/modules/workbench/view/use-is-active-view.tsx	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...ntend/core/src/modules/workbench/view/use-view.tsx	33.33%	4 Missing ⚠️
...core/src/modules/workbench/view/workbench-link.tsx	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
... and 7 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           canary    #5971      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   63.80%   62.41%   -1.39%     
==========================================
  Files         364      438      +74     
  Lines       20044    20908     +864     
  Branches     1700     1832     +132     
==========================================
+ Hits        12789    13050     +261     
- Misses       7038     7636     +598     
- Partials      217      222       +5     

Flag	Coverage Δ
server-test	71.04% <ø> (ø)
unittest	41.99% <23.80%> (-1.91%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[nx-cloud]

☁️ Nx Cloud Report

CI is running/has finished running commands for commit c599715. As they complete they will appear below. Click to see the status, the terminal output, and the build insights.

📂 See all runs for this CI Pipeline Execution

---

✅ Successfully ran 6 targets

• nx test:coverage @affine/monorepo
• nx build @affine/storage -- --target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-pc-windows-msvc --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-apple-darwin --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target aarch64-apple-darwin --use-napi-cross
• nx build @affine/native -- --target x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu --use-napi-cross

---

Sent with 💌 from NxCloud.

[EYHN]

• feat(core): resize and reorder split-view #5994
• feat(core): split right sidebar #5971 👈
• canary

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @EYHN and the rest of your teammates on Graphite

[EYHN]

/review

[codiumai-pr-agent-pro]

PR Review

⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]	5, because the PR involves significant changes across multiple files, including the introduction of new components, modifications to existing components, and the restructuring of the workbench and sidebar functionalities. The changes impact the core functionality and UI layout, requiring a thorough review to ensure compatibility and functionality.
🧪 Relevant tests	No
🔍 Possible issues	The removal of certain components and hooks might lead to missing functionalities or broken features if they are still being used elsewhere in the codebase.
	Significant changes to the layout and structure of the workbench and sidebars could introduce UI/UX inconsistencies or regressions.
	The introduction of new components and functionalities (e.g., RightSidebar, ViewBodyIsland, ViewHeaderIsland) requires careful testing to ensure they integrate well with the existing system and do not introduce new bugs.
🔒 Security concerns	No

Code feedback:

---

relevant file	packages/frontend/core/src/modules/workbench/view/use-view.tsx
suggestion	Consider adding error handling for the case where ViewContext is not provided. While the current implementation throws an error, it might be beneficial to provide a more descriptive error message or handle this case more gracefully. [medium]
relevant line	throw new Error(

---

relevant file	packages/frontend/core/src/modules/workbench/view/desktop-adapter.ts
suggestion	Ensure that the useEffect hook properly cleans up by returning a function that undoes the effect if necessary. This is crucial when binding and unbinding event listeners to avoid memory leaks. [medium]
relevant line	useLocation()

---

relevant file	packages/frontend/core/src/modules/multi-tab-sidebar/view/body.tsx
suggestion	For better error handling and user experience, consider rendering a fallback UI or a loading state when the Component is not available or while it's being loaded. [medium]
relevant line	{Component ? : null}

---

relevant file	packages/frontend/core/src/modules/right-sidebar/view/container.tsx
suggestion	When appending or removing views from the RightSidebar, consider implementing animations or transitions for a smoother user experience. This could enhance the visual feedback when the sidebar opens or closes. [medium]
relevant line	rightSidebar._append(view);

---

---

✨ Review tool usage guide:

---

Overview:
The review tool scans the PR code changes, and generates a PR review. The tool can be triggered automatically every time a new PR is opened, or can be invoked manually by commenting on any PR.
When commenting, to edit configurations related to the review tool (pr_reviewer section), use the following template:

/review --pr_reviewer.some_config1=... --pr_reviewer.some_config2=...

With a configuration file, use the following template:

[pr_reviewer]
some_config1=...
some_config2=...

Utilizing extra instructions The review tool can be configured with extra instructions, which can be used to guide the model to a feedback tailored to the needs of your project. Be specific, clear, and concise in the instructions. With extra instructions, you are the prompter. Specify the relevant sub-tool, and the relevant aspects of the PR that you want to emphasize. Examples for extra instructions: [pr_reviewer] # /review # extra_instructions=""" In the 'possible issues' section, emphasize the following: - Does the code logic cover relevant edge cases? - Is the code logic clear and easy to understand? - Is the code logic efficient? ... """ Use triple quotes to write multi-line instructions. Use bullet points to make the instructions more readable.

How to enable\disable automation When you first install PR-Agent app, the default mode for the review tool is: pr_commands = ["/review", ...] meaning the review tool will run automatically on every PR, with the default configuration. Edit this field to enable/disable the tool, or to change the used configurations

Auto-labels The review tool can auto-generate two specific types of labels for a PR: a possible security issue label, that detects possible security issues (enable_review_labels_security flag) a Review effort [1-5]: x label, where x is the estimated effort to review the PR (enable_review_labels_effort flag)

Extra sub-tools The review tool provides a collection of possible feedbacks about a PR. It is recommended to review the possible options, and choose the ones relevant for your use case. Some of the feature that are disabled by default are quite useful, and should be considered for enabling. For example: require_score_review, require_soc2_ticket, and more.

Auto-approve PRs By invoking: /review auto_approve The tool will automatically approve the PR, and add a comment with the approval. To ensure safety, the auto-approval feature is disabled by default. To enable auto-approval, you need to actively set in a pre-defined configuration file the following: [pr_reviewer] enable_auto_approval = true (this specific flag cannot be set with a command line argument, only in the configuration file, committed to the repository) You can also enable auto-approval only if the PR meets certain requirements, such as that the estimated_review_effort is equal or below a certain threshold, by adjusting the flag: [pr_reviewer] maximal_review_effort = 5

More PR-Agent commands To invoke the PR-Agent, add a comment using one of the following commands: /review: Request a review of your Pull Request. /describe: Update the PR title and description based on the contents of the PR. /improve [--extended]: Suggest code improvements. Extended mode provides a higher quality feedback. /ask <QUESTION>: Ask a question about the PR. /update_changelog: Update the changelog based on the PR's contents. /add_docs 💎: Generate docstring for new components introduced in the PR. /generate_labels 💎: Generate labels for the PR based on the PR's contents. /analyze 💎: Automatically analyzes the PR, and presents changes walkthrough for each component. See the tools guide for more details. To list the possible configuration parameters, add a /config comment.

See the review usage page for a comprehensive guide on using this tool.

[pengx17]

LGTM overall. It seems some UI details may need to be fixed later.
Also, perhaps adding a couple of more tests?

[graphite-app]

Merge activity

• Mar 4, 1:10 AM EST: EYHN added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Mar 4, 1:19 AM EST: The Graphite merge queue couldn't merge this PR because it was not satisfying all requirements.
• Mar 4, 1:41 AM EST: EYHN added this pull request to the Graphite merge queue.
• Mar 4, 1:50 AM EST: EYHN merged this pull request with the Graphite merge queue.