🔥 HOT: WordPress/gutenberg/pull/ - Uncensored 2025
{{ message }}
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
|
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message. To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
| dispatch( preferencesStore ).setDefaults( 'core', { | ||
| allowRightClickOverrides: true, | ||
| editorMode: 'visual', | ||
| editorTool: 'edit', |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does it make sense to initialize the default value to edit here? Or we could just change the condition here to editorMode !== 'navigation'?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm on the fence here. On one hand, I don't think it would cause much harm to set the default here, but then we'd probably to add a default for edit-post too (and would it also be 'edit'? probably). On the other hand, fixing the condition to editorMode !== 'navigation' seems to more precisely target the underlying issue, which is that hiding the side inserter should be seen as the exception and not the norm — and once you fix that you don't care which editor you're in, nor what state is persisted.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes agreed, changing the condition for rendering the inserter would be preferable.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this was the right fix (adding the default) because there could be a lot more places impacted than just the inserter check. That said, I would love for us to avoid these imperative setDefault calls somehow at some point, it doesn't feel like a great API. Or maybe the "setDefaults" are not done in the right place, we shouldn't have to duplicate this code everywhere.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That said, I would love for us to avoid these imperative
setDefaultcalls somehow at some point, it doesn't feel like a great API. Or maybe the "setDefaults" are not done in the right place, we shouldn't have to duplicate this code everywhere
+1
6 tasks
|
Size Change: +12 B (0%) Total Size: 1.81 MB
ℹ️ View Unchanged
|
|
I tested this PR, but it doesn't fix the issue for me. That said, I did not delete existing persisted data, because a normal user can't do that. Also, I have difficulty understanding how the inserter is missing because of a default value. Why not adjust the conditions for which the inserter appears? |
|
The more I think about this, the more I think the fix should be twofold:
|
@ellatrix The value might not be
I think it's better to give it the default value for the long term as @mcsf suggested. It doesn't make sense that |
|
I've updated the PR as follows
|
|
Flaky tests detected in 421541d. 🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/11623314338
|
|
Is this likely to get backported to 19.6? |
priethor
added
[Package] Block editor
|
I just cherry-picked this PR to the release/19.5 branch to get it included in the next release: d65a196 |
priethor
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 1, 2024
* Post Editor: Set the default value of the editorTool to edit * Change the condition of _showEmptyBlockSideInserter * Set the default value of the editorTool to "edit" for both post editor and site editor
priethor
removed
the
Backport to Gutenberg Minor Release
priethor
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 1, 2024
* Post Editor: Set the default value of the editorTool to edit * Change the condition of _showEmptyBlockSideInserter * Set the default value of the editorTool to "edit" for both post editor and site editor
|
I just cherry-picked this PR to the release/19.6 branch to get it included in the next release: 9b9a367 |
priethor
removed
the
Backport to Gutenberg RC
karthick-murugan
pushed a commit
to karthick-murugan/gutenberg
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 13, 2024
…ss#66636) * Post Editor: Set the default value of the editorTool to edit * Change the condition of _showEmptyBlockSideInserter * Set the default value of the editorTool to "edit" for both post editor and site editor
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.
What?
Fixes #66632.
Fix the
editorToolmight not be initialized on the post editor.Why?
Referring to #66632, the block inserter is missing because the
editorModeis noteditHow?
Initialize the default value of the
editorToolto theediton the post editor. Note that the site editor initializes the value here, and the tool selector just checks whether the value is navigation.Testing Instructions
Testing Instructions for Keyboard
Screenshots or screencast