Skip to content

[doc] Add an ADR on the evolution of the refresh of the representations#6325

Merged
sbegaudeau merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
sbe/enh/adr-refresh
Mar 27, 2026
Merged

[doc] Add an ADR on the evolution of the refresh of the representations#6325
sbegaudeau merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
sbe/enh/adr-refresh

Conversation

@sbegaudeau
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Signed-off-by: Stéphane Bégaudeau stephane.begaudeau@obeo.fr

Pull request template

General purpose

What is the main goal of this pull request?

  • Bug fixes
  • New features
  • Documentation
  • Cleanup
  • Tests
  • Build / releng

Project management

  • Has the pull request been added to the relevant project and milestone? (Only if you know that your work is part of a specific iteration such as the current one)
  • Have the priority: and pr: labels been added to the pull request? (In case of doubt, start with the labels priority: low and pr: to review later)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the pull request?
  • Have the relevant labels been added to the issues? (area:, difficulty:, type:)
  • Have the relevant issues been added to the same project and milestone as the pull request?
  • Has the CHANGELOG.adoc been updated to reference the relevant issues?
  • Have the relevant API breaks been described in the CHANGELOG.adoc? (Including changes in the GraphQL API)
  • In case of a change with a visual impact, are there any screenshots in the CHANGELOG.adoc? For example in doc/screenshots/2022.5.0-my-new-feature.png

Architectural decision records (ADR)

  • Does the title of the commit contributing the ADR start with [doc]?
  • Are the ADRs mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Dependencies

  • Are the new / upgraded dependencies mentioned in the relevant section of the CHANGELOG.adoc?
  • Are the new dependencies justified in the CHANGELOG.adoc?

Frontend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the frontend.

General purpose

  • Is the code properly tested? (Plain old JavaScript tests for business code and tests based on React Testing Library for the components)

Typing

We need to improve the typing of our code, as such, we require every contribution to come with proper TypeScript typing for both changes contributing new files and those modifying existing files.
Please ensure that the following statements are true for each file created or modified (this may require you to improve code outside of your contribution).

  • Variables have a proper type
  • Functions’ arguments have a proper type
  • Functions’ return type are specified
  • Hooks are properly typed:
    • useMutation<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useQuery<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useSubscription<DATA_TYPE, VARIABLE_TYPE>(…)
    • useMachine<CONTEXT_TYPE, EVENTS_TYPE>(…)
    • useState<STATE_TYPE>(…)
  • All components have a proper typing for their props
  • No useless optional chaining with ?. (if the GraphQL API specifies that a field cannot be null, do not treat it has potentially null for example)
  • Nullable values have a proper type (for example let diagram: Diagram | null = null;)

Backend

This section is not relevant if your contribution does not come with changes to the backend.

General purpose

  • Are all the event handlers tested?
  • Are the event processor tested?
  • Is the business code (services) tested?
  • Are diagram layout changes tested?

Architecture

  • Are data structure classes properly separated from behavioral classes?
  • Are all the relevant fields final?
  • Is any data structure mutable? If so, please write a comment indicating why
  • Are behavioral classes either stateless or side effect free?

Review

How to test this PR?

Please describe here the various use cases to test this pull request

  • Has the Kiwi TCMS test suite been updated with tests for this contribution?

- Finally, we will validate the approach with the `DeckEventProcessor` which is complex enough with its support for events
- Remove the previous API

During this transition period, if an implementation of `IRepresentationRefresher` exists for a given representation event processor.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This sentence does not feel complete

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

- as the entry point to perform changes on representations
- to perform the refresh of the representations

This create a large set of constraints on those classes with tons of responsibilities mixed together.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This creates

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

Since we have already removed some responsibilities related to the refresh from the `EditingContextEventProcessor` thanks to the introduction of the `RepresentationEventProcessorRefresher`.
We should not add the burden of the refresh to another existing concept.

One of the issue with the coupling of the refresh within the representation event processors is the coupling between the execution of the refresh which should be stateless and the state of the event processor which is inheritely stateful.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

One of the issues

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done


In the past, we have never formalized what the state of the representation event processor is.
Most people may still assume that it is limited to the `IRepresentation`.
We tried to moved towar an immutable data structure for the state of the `DiagramEventProcessor` with the switch to a record for `DiagramContext`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We tried to move

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@pcdavid pcdavid left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just a typo


In the past, we have never formalized what the state of the representation event processor is.
Most people may still assume that it is limited to the `IRepresentation`.
We tried to moved towar an immutable data structure for the state of the `DiagramEventProcessor` with the switch to a record for `DiagramContext`.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Typo: "moved towar[d]"

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Done

Signed-off-by: Stéphane Bégaudeau <stephane.begaudeau@obeo.fr>
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau force-pushed the sbe/enh/adr-refresh branch from db1bc74 to 478da1e Compare March 27, 2026 09:07
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau requested a review from frouene March 27, 2026 09:07
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau merged commit ee5eafc into master Mar 27, 2026
2 checks passed
@sbegaudeau sbegaudeau deleted the sbe/enh/adr-refresh branch March 27, 2026 13:20
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants