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

WP 6.3-beta3: User is not given the choice in the patterns admin of what type of pattern to create (synced/unsynced) #52329

Closed
bvlgn opened this issue Jul 5, 2023 · 3 comments · Fixed by #52352
Labels
[Feature] Synced Patterns Related to synced patterns (formerly reusable blocks) Needs Technical Feedback Needs testing from a developer perspective. [Type] Regression Related to a regression in the latest release

Comments

@bvlgn
Copy link

bvlgn commented Jul 5, 2023

Description

When adding a new pattern using the Add New button on the admin screen the user is not presented with the dialog to choose wether he wants to add a synced or an unsynced pattern.

The pattern will thus by marked as synced and the user has no option to change that to unsynced

Step-by-step reproduction instructions

  1. Go to /wp-admin/edit.php?post_type=wp_block
  2. Click on the [Add New] button
  3. The pattern is added as a synced pattern (no choice given)

Screenshots, screen recording, code snippet

No response

Environment info

WordPress: 6.3-beta3

Please confirm that you have searched existing issues in the repo.

Yes

Please confirm that you have tested with all plugins deactivated except Gutenberg.

Yes

@skorasaurus skorasaurus added [Feature] Synced Patterns Related to synced patterns (formerly reusable blocks) Needs Technical Feedback Needs testing from a developer perspective. [Type] Regression Related to a regression in the latest release labels Jul 5, 2023
@skorasaurus
Copy link
Member

Hi,
Thanks for reporting; I am able to reproduce this as well on Gutenberg 16.1.1, WP 6.2

I am not sure if this is the intentional behavior and right now, the workflow (for creating patterns - both sync and unsynced) is very unclear.

What is now the expected user flow for creating patterns?

(In the mean time, I suppose you could use register_block_pattern for registering unsynced block patterns and then using the above directions you mentioned to create a synced pattern (aka: reusable block)

@bvlgn
Copy link
Author

bvlgn commented Jul 5, 2023

I am not sure if this is the intentional behavior

I am testing this new functionality introduced in 6.3. In 6.2 this was expected behavior, but since 6.3 the wp_block pattern is being used to store both synced patterns (in wp 6.2 called reusable blocks) en standard/unsynced patterns (this is new). At other places in the updated WP 6.3 UI the user is shown a dialog to set the desired pattern type, but they forgot to do the same for the Add New button, hence my beta bug report, so that it can be fixed before the final WP6.3 release ;-)

The dialog as shown in other places in WP 6.3, e.g. when you convert selected blocks via the more menu in the block editor to a pattern:

Scherm­afbeelding 2023-07-05 om 18 11 53

This modal should also be shown when the user clicks on the Add New button in the admin screen.

@annezazu
Copy link
Contributor

annezazu commented Jul 6, 2023

Just to close the loop, can confirm this is a regression and a PR is in progress to help address this! Thanks so much for reporting and testing ✨

@ndiego ndiego moved this from 📥 Todo to 🏗️ In Progress in WordPress 6.3.x Editor Tasks Jul 10, 2023
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from 🏗️ In Progress to ✅ Done in WordPress 6.3.x Editor Tasks Jul 11, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
[Feature] Synced Patterns Related to synced patterns (formerly reusable blocks) Needs Technical Feedback Needs testing from a developer perspective. [Type] Regression Related to a regression in the latest release
Projects
No open projects
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants