Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 13, 2024. It is now read-only.

[MM-13663][MM-11504] Adds bi-directional scrolling and use unread API on channel load #2274

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

sudheerDev
Copy link
Contributor

Summary

Adds bi-directional scrolling and uses unread API on channel load

Ticket Link

MM-13663
MM-11504

Checklist

[Place an '[x]' (no spaces) in all applicable fields. Please remove unrelated fields.]

  • Ran make check-style to check for style errors (required for all pull requests)
  • Ran make test to ensure unit and component tests passed
  • Added or updated unit tests (required for all new features)
  • Has redux changes (please link)
  • Has UI changes

  * Refactor post_list to have a wrapper for calling
    respective posts
  * Use unread API for loading posts on load.
  * Use since or before_id based on the channel status
    of posts.
  * Clear postInChannel when entering from a view which is not at
    latest post
  * Take a backup before clearing posts as we might need it incase of
    network issues.
  * Always use oldest postId or newest postId for loading posts.
  * Fix async render of channelView by using a flag on channelView.
  * Change dependency of post_list to have channeId instead of channel.
  * Add channel selector for channel_intro_message component.
  * Add constants for AFTER_ID and BEFORE_ID.
@sudheerDev sudheerDev added the 2: Dev Review Requires review by a core commiter label Jan 16, 2019
@amyblais amyblais added this to the v5.8.0 milestone Jan 22, 2019
@enahum
Copy link
Contributor

enahum commented Jan 23, 2019

@amyblais I believe this will be available in 5.10 not 5.8

@enahum
Copy link
Contributor

enahum commented Jan 23, 2019

@sudheerDev should we merge this against the feature branch instead of master?

@sudheerDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

Feature branch wasn't updated in a while and there are a lot of merge conflicts so raised another PR and i thought to use this as base for future work.

I am not really sure on how we should go about this. Should i fix the conflicts of feature branch and raise it against it?

Feature branch has almost same code without auto-load, scroll logic and minor refactors.

@enahum
Copy link
Contributor

enahum commented Jan 23, 2019

@sudheerDev I think we should keep the feature branches up to date yes!

@amyblais amyblais removed this from the v5.8.0 milestone Jan 24, 2019
@enahum enahum added the Do Not Merge Should not be merged until this label is removed label Jan 25, 2019
@mattermod
Copy link
Contributor

This issue has been automatically labelled "stale" because it hasn't had recent activity.
A core team member will check in on the status of the PR to help with questions.
Thank you for your contribution!

/cc @jasonblais @hanzei

@hanzei
Copy link
Contributor

hanzei commented Mar 12, 2019

Hey @sudheerDev,

Could you please give a quick update on this PR? What is the status?

@sudheerDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hanzei We will be working on this sometime this week. This is blocked by #2447

@jasonblais
Copy link
Contributor

@sudheerDev Should I add a lifecycle:frozen label to keep the PR open?

@sudheerDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jasonblais Done changed the label on this. We mostly will be working in sprint 60/61

@amyblais amyblais added this to the v5.12.0 milestone May 9, 2019
@amyblais amyblais removed this from the v5.12.0 milestone May 16, 2019
@hanzei hanzei removed the 2: Dev Review Requires review by a core commiter label May 29, 2019
@hanzei hanzei removed request for hmhealey and enahum May 29, 2019 20:14
@hanzei hanzei added Work in Progress Not yet ready for review and removed Do Not Merge Should not be merged until this label is removed labels May 29, 2019
@sudheerDev
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this in favour of #3049

@sudheerDev sudheerDev closed this Jul 3, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Lifecycle/frozen Work in Progress Not yet ready for review
Projects
None yet
6 participants