Skip to content

Conversation

@navinkarkera
Copy link
Contributor

@navinkarkera navinkarkera commented Jan 1, 2026

Description

In addition to changes in #2775 (comment), this PR adds following:

Adds library dropdown filter and collections dropdown filter in add sidebar. Allows authors to filter containers by selected libraries and collections.

Useful information to include:

  • Which user roles will this change impact? "Course Author".

Screenshots

image image image image

Supporting information

Testing instructions

  • Use the new library dropdown filter in add sidebar.
  • Verify the containers are being filtered.
  • Verify the label changes based on number of libraries selected.

Other information

  • Requirement not clear for collections filter.

Best Practices Checklist

We're trying to move away from some deprecated patterns in this codebase. Please
check if your PR meets these recommendations before asking for a review:

  • Any new files are using TypeScript (.ts, .tsx).
  • Avoid propTypes and defaultProps in any new or modified code.
  • Tests should use the helpers in src/testUtils.tsx (specifically initializeMocks)
  • Do not add new fields to the Redux state/store. Use React Context to share state among multiple components.
  • Use React Query to load data from REST APIs. See any apiHooks.ts in this repo for examples.
  • All new i18n messages in messages.ts files have a description for translators to use.
  • Avoid using ../ in import paths. To import from parent folders, use @src, e.g. import { initializeMocks } from '@src/testUtils'; instead of from '../../../../testUtils'

@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U core contributor PR author is a Core Contributor (who may or may not have write access to this repo). labels Jan 1, 2026
@openedx-webhooks
Copy link

openedx-webhooks commented Jan 1, 2026

Thanks for the pull request, @navinkarkera!

This repository is currently maintained by @bradenmacdonald.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.
🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads
🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Details
Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 1, 2026

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 96.57658% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 95.04%. Comparing base (a7cbfea) to head (71a2195).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
src/CourseAuthoringContext.tsx 86.66% 6 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/outline-sidebar/AddSidebar.tsx 95.06% 4 Missing ⚠️
src/course-outline/utils.tsx 81.81% 2 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/LibraryAuthoringPage.tsx 93.10% 2 Missing ⚠️
...ary-authoring/collections/CollectionInfoHeader.tsx 83.33% 1 Missing ⚠️
...ry-authoring/collections/LibraryCollectionPage.tsx 90.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/data/api.ts 87.50% 1 Missing ⚠️
src/library-authoring/data/apiHooks.ts 94.11% 1 Missing ⚠️
...brary-authoring/library-filters/SidebarFilters.tsx 94.11% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2778      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   94.99%   95.04%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files        1256     1264       +8     
  Lines       28800    29123     +323     
  Branches     6538     6648     +110     
==========================================
+ Hits        27358    27681     +323     
+ Misses       1384     1372      -12     
- Partials       58       70      +12     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

Copy link
Contributor

@rpenido rpenido left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM 👍
Thank you for your work, @navinkarkera!

  • I tested this using the instructions from the PR
  • I read through the code
  • I checked for accessibility issues
  • Includes documentation

await waitFor(() => expect(mockApi).toHaveBeenLastCalledWith({
pagination: false,
search: 'Test Library',
}), { timeout: 600 });
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Out of curiosity: why do we need this timeout here?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rpenido We delay request to backend by 500ms everytime user types something to avoid sending request on each character change by using debounce here. So we need to wait for atleast 500ms in the tests.

@mphilbrick211 mphilbrick211 added the FC Relates to an Axim Funded Contribution project label Jan 5, 2026
@mphilbrick211 mphilbrick211 moved this from Needs Triage to Waiting on Author in Contributions Jan 5, 2026
@navinkarkera navinkarkera force-pushed the navin/fal-4298/filter-libraries-dropdown branch from 368ada5 to 469e469 Compare January 7, 2026 14:56
Copy link
Contributor

@bradenmacdonald bradenmacdonald left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks for those changes!

@navinkarkera navinkarkera force-pushed the navin/fal-4298/filter-libraries-dropdown branch from 638c09c to 07773d1 Compare January 8, 2026 05:11
@navinkarkera navinkarkera marked this pull request as ready for review January 8, 2026 16:07
Copy link
Contributor

@rpenido rpenido left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you for your work, @navinkarkera! Kudos for the great refactor here

I left some comments (optional) and a minor bug that I found.

openComponentEditor('', (data) => data && linkComponent(data.id), blockType);
} else {
openComponentEditor?.('', (data) => data && linkComponent(data.id), blockType);
} else if (libraryId) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

libraryId should always be defined here. The type inference is not getting it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@rpenido We were using useOptionalLibraryContext(), so libraryId could be undefined. But I tested now with normal useLibraryContext and it seems to be working fine without errors as the AddContent component is not displayed anywhere via ComponentPicker.

overflow-y: auto;
min-height: 100vh;
height: 100%;
max-height: 300vh;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we need this to solve any specific issue?
Couldn't we let the sidebar take all the height?

Suggested change
max-height: 300vh;

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, if we have a lot of library content, the sidebar becomes very long. So I limited it to 3 times of viewport with scroll.


export function useOptionalLibraryContext(): Partial<LibraryContextData> {
const ctx = useContext(LibraryContext);
return ctx || {};
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Trying to add from an empty library was showing the Add component button:

Image

I think it is safe to always return readOnly: true if we don't have the library context here (we will be probably inside a picker)

Suggested change
return ctx || {};
return ctx || { readOnly: true };

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice catch! Thanks!

@navinkarkera navinkarkera force-pushed the navin/fal-4298/filter-libraries-dropdown branch from f710585 to 71a2195 Compare January 9, 2026 06:08
@navinkarkera navinkarkera changed the title feat: library dropdown filter in add sidebar feat: Add sidebar and library dropdown filter Jan 9, 2026
@navinkarkera navinkarkera changed the title feat: Add sidebar and library dropdown filter feat: Add sidebar and library dropdown filter [FC-0014] Jan 9, 2026
@navinkarkera navinkarkera changed the title feat: Add sidebar and library dropdown filter [FC-0014] feat: Add sidebar and library dropdown filter [FC-0114] Jan 9, 2026
Copy link
Contributor

@ChrisChV ChrisChV left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@navinkarkera The code looks good! Very nice work!

@ChrisChV ChrisChV merged commit 3c22e4b into openedx:master Jan 9, 2026
7 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Waiting on Author to Done in Contributions Jan 9, 2026
@bradenmacdonald bradenmacdonald deleted the navin/fal-4298/filter-libraries-dropdown branch January 9, 2026 19:13
@bradenmacdonald
Copy link
Contributor

@navinkarkera @ChrisChV This is causing problems with the sidebar for me.

Before After (sidebar at bottom) After (sidebar too wide)
before 2778 after 2778 after 2778 b

Also, what's the plan for when the sidebar is at the bottom of the screen? It seems unusable when it's at the very bottom of the outline, and the upper "change sidebar" button doesn't seem to do anything if you can't even see the sidebar. I'm not sure what the point is of making it responsive like this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

core contributor PR author is a Core Contributor (who may or may not have write access to this repo). FC Relates to an Axim Funded Contribution project open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants