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

Plan for FE code for Plus in Core #1041

Closed
ssangervasi opened this issue Sep 1, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

Plan for FE code for Plus in Core #1041

ssangervasi opened this issue Sep 1, 2022 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@ssangervasi
Copy link
Contributor

ssangervasi commented Sep 1, 2022

The new challenge that integrating Cls introduces is:

  • On a page in the non-Plus Ctl UI, we want to add content that is only usable in the Plus edition.
  • This is different from the Data Map, which is an entire page that is only provided by Plus.
  • This has some overlap with the nav bar, which needs to have a mix of Plus and non-Plus links.

There are two options to make this possible:

Option 1: The Plus frontend code lives in main repo

With this option, all of the Plus FE is available as open source, but any features which require the Plus BE are disabled.

Pros:

  • Quick to get started
  • Would work for all similar changes going forward
  • FE team gets to centralize in core repo

Cons:

  • Any FE code that doesn't rely on BE functionality can't be gated behind Plus.
    • Unless we keep do the Data Map approach and make it a separate zone (page).
  • The mismatch Plus FE code that lives in the Plus repo (Data Map) and the main repo could be hard to keep track of.
Alternative considered

Option 2: The Plus frontend builds its own copy of the whole UI

This would require cloning/copying/packaging the Ctl UI code so that Plus can re-use and modify it.

Pros:

  • The Plus UI can modify any aspect of the app
  • Plus features live in the Plus repo
  • Removes zone shenanigans

Cons

  • Requires a full rework of how we bring main repo UI code into the Plus repo
  • It's likely one repo would start lagging behind the other as we maintain both
@ssangervasi ssangervasi self-assigned this Sep 1, 2022
@ssangervasi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ssangervasi
Copy link
Contributor Author

ssangervasi commented Sep 8, 2022

Dug into the design and listed what we'll need to do. I'll convert this list into issues and tackle them roughly in order.

@mfbrown
Copy link

mfbrown commented Sep 8, 2022

Dug into the design and listed what we'll need to do. I'll convert this list into issues and tackle them roughly in order.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants