Open zanyrenney opened 1 year ago
Current assignees @puneetlath and @zanyrenney are eligible for the Bug assigner, not assigning anyone new.
Platforms
in OP are ✅)for @puneetlath @cubuspl42 - we discussed this in DM on Slack. Still going over some of the details and write up of payment details but creating this as a holding/tracking issue.
@zanyrenney Shouldn't I be C+ here?
Yep, i was going to assign you when we had all the details but happy to assign you now @parasharrajat
@puneetlath @zanyrenney Is there any way we could use the status that Expensify is an Incubating partner and Software Mansion is a Partner to get me added to as the Core Contributor, possibly bending the formal requirements?
I'll need to apply changes in low-lever parts of the framework (including ReactCommon
, the C++ layer), so it would be awesome to be able to get some feedback and hints on the Core Contributor Discord server.
Hey @cubuspl42 - I think you got great initial feedback by the discussions and proposals process which means you should proceed on creating a pull request and getting feedback there 👍
Going to make this a weekly as I think that's a more realistic cadence for us to expect updates on this.
At least until Melvin changes it to Daily again 😅
That sounds good to me, thanks @puneetlath
@cubuspl42 Please keep us posted here about new milestones.
The first PR is being reviewed, or at least is supposed to be. The part that I need to modify has been copy-pasted over 3 places for years, and I'm trying to clean that up before adding new features there.
There was some minor initial movement in the mentioned PR, but otherwise nothing for a week.
A cat picture from my private gallery didn't work.
This project will need several PRs, and this one was just moving things around to make the next steps possible.
@AndrewGable
@puneetlath @cubuspl42 @parasharrajat @zanyrenney this issue was created 2 weeks ago. Are we close to a solution? Let's make sure we're treating this as a top priority. Don't hesitate to create a thread in #expensify-open-source to align faster in real time. Thanks!
Thanks for the update @cubuspl42 - is there something specific you need from @AndrewGable? If it would help to take this issue to slack for a conversation, please feel free to do so and link in the relevant assignees.
We've GOT A RESPONSE
@puneetlath @cubuspl42 @parasharrajat @zanyrenney this issue is now 3 weeks old. There is one more week left before this issue breaks WAQ. What needs to happen to get a PR in review this week? Please create a thread in #expensify-open-source to discuss. Thanks!
great work @cubuspl42 !!
@puneetlath, @cubuspl42, @parasharrajat, @zanyrenney Whoops! This issue is 2 days overdue. Let's get this updated quick!
Latest is in the issue linked above by @cubuspl42 but they got feedback from @mdvacca on the proposal and responded with more details.
Looks like that was today, and we're still waiting for further feedback / next steps from @mdvacca
thanks for pushing this forward @cubuspl42 !
@puneetlath @cubuspl42 @parasharrajat @zanyrenney this issue is now 4 weeks old and preventing us from maintaining WAQ. This should now be your highest priority. Please post below what your plan is to get a PR in review ASAP. Thanks!
Current assignees @cubuspl42 and @parasharrajat are eligible for the Internal assigner, not assigning anyone new.
any further update here @cubuspl42 ?
I made a whole list of changes based on the feedback. I asked two questions and I'm waiting for a response. I'll bump.
Thank you!
Waiting on feedback on the changes from @cubuspl42
@zanyrenney This isn't reasonable to be daily
I'll update the labels, thanks for this @cubuspl42 !
any further updates now on this one @cubuspl42 ?
The last update from Meta was yesterday, promising a review of the latest changes.
I also started planning the next steps here.
Awesome, thanks so much for the links to those conversations!
how are we doing here team?
That's great to hear. Normally, the response rate is very slow on RN repo.
@cubuspl42 can you please share a roadmap here so that we understand the timeline?
E.g
Our requirement is:
asadsadasdasdasdasdsadsadasdasdasdasdasdasdasdasdasdsadasdsadasdasdasdsadasdasd
or https://www.google.com/search?q=gool&oq=gool&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUqBggAEEUYOzIGCAAQRRg7MgcIARAAGI8CMgcIAhAAGI8CMgcIAxAAGI8CMgYIBBBFGDzSAQc4MzBqMGoxqAIAsAIA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
Sure.
In PR 2, which builds a ReactCore
structure for the "spanned" AttributedString
(an intermediate C++ structure between JS Text
and native rendering components), I asked for feedback on the way these new capabilities can be exposed in RN API. I suggested two alternatives, but I think in the presence of the radio silence I'll just pick one of these two options and proceed.
Later, the deserialization code on two platforms (Android and iOS) must be adjusted. I think I'll just start with Android first. I'll build on top of the de-duplicated logic from PR 1.
Once this new "spanned" structure is available for the platform-specific rendering code, I'll start porting my rendering bits from the proof-of-concept implementation into RN codebase, feature by feature, starting with "non-filled line gaps" (fillLineGap={false}
).
Then we'll proceed with the other features, like the inline borders and inline padding.
The first big challenge here is to make RN at all reason about "spans" instead of a tree of text nodes that affect inherited character-level styles.
This is a rough "timeline" (or probably more like a plan, as it didn't contain time points).
I think I'll try to achieve a working Android implementation even without any further feedback from Meta. Maybe seeing a working thing will motivate them to participate more.
@puneetlath are you able to take a look at the comment above and see what you think of the plan / timeline? I'm not as familiar so it would be great to get your view! Thanks!
So far, I hoped to enter a feedback loop with Meta, but maybe that's unrealistic... Previously, it wasn't that bad, but my last feedback request got ignored, although bumped twice.
Two optimistic notes:
@cortinico
, has been on vacation for the last two weeks or so, so maybe once he comes back, I can count on some feedback from him. He seems to be really experienced and relatively responsive.The plan seems good to me! I don't think we really have any other choice. Thanks for your persistence @cubuspl42
Has there been any more progress since the last update for feedback @cubuspl42 ?
I have pinged guys in the first PR in the context of "some internal changes" they have to make before it's merged: https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/39630#issuecomment-1806597899
In the second PR (https://github.com/facebook/react-native/pull/41283) I pinged @cortinico
, as he's back from vacations.
Having said that, I have some new ideas for moving forward in a relatively "safe" way, without Meta's intermediate feedback (which of course would be extremely valuable). I haven't done much of it yet because of the day-to-day C+ work, but I'll hopefully share some progress next week 🙂
Nice work, so still in a holding pattern before their feedback?
In PR 1, I was given conflicting requirements. I tried to find a way to meet them both, but I don't think it's possible. I asked to drop one of them (the one that's not enforced by tools...).
PR 2 is still without feedback, but I'm moving forward without it. It's hard not to loose hope here, but I still have some.
That's why RN is still not v1 and flutter reached v3
Any luck @cubuspl42?
@puneetlath Not much luck, but...
In the "PR 1", the one with necessary Android refactorings...
As Nick hasn't replied to my questions, I decided to revert some of the changes earlier suggested in the PR, which caused static code analysis failures in the "internal Meta systems". I also tweaked some other minor details. I bumped Nick.
In the "PR 2", the one with the C++ layer structure...
I'm making some progress offline. My C++ code itself seems to work fine.
Porting my PoC to React Native on Android is tricky, because they have some hacky workarounds for an archaic Android bug, which break the Spannable
layout lines. I'm trying to work this around.
Got it, thanks for the update!
Looks like there is some semi-active conversation happening in the PR, so that's a positive sign.
Yes, there were some replies!
As soon as this one is merged, I have some other PRs ready to submit; I'm careful not to overwhelm them. I think we'll get there, just... not very soon.
The PR with Android refactorings is approved and is planned to be merged next week!
This is excellent news, as this code provides the crucial interfaces that can be extended to add the new functionality related to inline code blocks. I have most of the Android and common C++ code ready to split up to PRs and submit for review after it is rebased on top of the "exported" form of the above PR.
Issue is failing https://github.com/Expensify/App/pull/4624 (CC @parasharrajat)
Action Performed:
Expected Result:
Code block should be displayed in the area of the conversation.
Actual Result:
Code block is partially visible because is overflowing the app border.
Platform:
Where is this issue occurring?
Version Number: 1.0.86-2
Logs: https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/4856
Notes/Photos/Videos: Any additional supporting documentation
Expensify/Expensify Issue URL:
View all open jobs on GitHub
Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit
Issue Owner
Current Issue Owner: @puneetlath