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

Docs: Fix the Blueprint example of the Gutenberg PR preview #1268

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 19, 2024

Conversation

ironnysh
Copy link
Collaborator

What is this PR doing?

Fixes the Playground example embedded in this documentation page, which didn't load.

How is the problem addressed?

  1. Resolved the errors displayed in the browser console.
  2. Updated the Blueprint based on the code of the official Previewer.
  3. Replaced the PR loaded in the example.

Why step 3?

It seems that there's an unrelated problem with the specific PR used in the demo:

  1. It doesn't work when loading it directly in the Gutenberg PR Previewer.
  2. Other random PRs load correctly in the example.

Using 60819 can be a temporary workaround.

Testing Instructions

  1. Run nx dev docs-site.
  2. Go to this documentation page.
  3. Scroll a bit, and click the Try it now button.

@adamziel adamziel merged commit 33196bf into trunk Apr 19, 2024
5 checks passed
@adamziel adamziel deleted the fix-playground-example-in-docs branch April 19, 2024 17:05
@adamziel
Copy link
Collaborator

Thank you @ironnysh! I merged and only noted this later – let's also update the captions to say PR 60819. I'm not sure what's wrong with 47739, but I hope it's not a problem with GitHub removing older artifacts as that would mean we'll have to update these docs periodically or find a different way of demonstrating the previewer. CC @bgrgicak – would you please check?

@ironnysh
Copy link
Collaborator Author

let's also update the captions to say PR 60819.

Sure. I'll open a new PR.

a problem with GitHub removing older artifacts

I did some tests with a bunch of random PRs (in different statuses) going back to 2017, and seems like that's indeed the problem.

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.

2 participants