Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

FORMS-7696 Add support for 6.5 client library theme approach to arche… #1060

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 8, 2023

Conversation

barshat7
Copy link
Contributor

…type page component

Description

Related Issue

Motivation and Context

How Has This Been Tested?

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • I have signed the Adobe Open Source CLA.
  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

data-sly-use.formstructparser="com.adobe.cq.forms.core.components.models.form.FormStructureParser"
data-sly-test.themeClientLibRef="${symbol_dollar}{formstructparser.themeClientLibRefFromFormContainer}">
<sly data-sly-test="${symbol_dollar}{themeClientLibRef}" data-sly-call="${symbol_dollar}{clientlib.css @ categories=themeClientLibRef}"/>
</sly>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Why do we need this in archetype, it is already there in core-component repo?
cc @pankaj-parashar @barshat7

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@barshat7 what is different script being added here as compared to archetype component core/fd/components/page/v1/page. What was the use case to provide a override at this level? In case of core component, the proxy component is not overriding.
cc : @rismehta

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My understanding is the archetype overrides these files for the proxy over what is present in the core components. This means that any changes done in the core components do not get reflected in projects deployed via the archetype.

The only solution, for now, is to keep the overriding done for the archetype consistent with what is provided by the core components until we reach a state where no custom overriding is needed at the archetype level.

Copy link
Contributor

@rismehta rismehta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please check comments

src/main/archetype/it.tests/pom.xml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@rismehta rismehta left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@rismehta rismehta merged commit d60d1f9 into develop May 8, 2023
@rismehta rismehta deleted the FORMS-7696 branch May 8, 2023 09:42
@barshat7 barshat7 added this to the 42 milestone Jun 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants