Skip to content

Core component sessions for custom session store #6961

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 3, 2025

Conversation

distantnative
Copy link
Member

@distantnative distantnative commented Jan 29, 2025

Changelog

Feature

  • New session::store core component: return your custom SessionStore handler

Ready?

  • In-code documentation (wherever needed)
  • Unit tests for fixed bug/feature
  • Tests and CI checks all pass

For review team

  • Add changes & docs to release notes draft in Notion

@distantnative distantnative added this to the 4.7.0 milestone Jan 29, 2025
@distantnative distantnative self-assigned this Jan 29, 2025
@distantnative distantnative marked this pull request as ready for review January 29, 2025 13:00
@distantnative distantnative requested a review from a team January 29, 2025 13:00
Copy link
Member

@bastianallgeier bastianallgeier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I love the idea. @lukasbestle should have a final look at it, but I think it's great to move more parts to core components.

@lukasbestle
Copy link
Member

For v5 we added a storage component. I think the naming is quite confusing.

Maybe we should rename storage to contentStorage and the new sessions to sessionStorage. Should there be other storage types in the future, we would already have a clear and consistent pattern.

@distantnative
Copy link
Member Author

Would these be anything else around sessions? Otherwise I'd stick with that name, the storage suffix doesn't make it easier to understand IMO.

@lukasbestle
Copy link
Member

I don't think we need any other session-related component at this time. We might in the future, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.

I think it would increase consistency by using the same suffix for all storage-related components. Also all existing components (except smartypants, which is a given name) are singular. By using sessionStorage or session::storage, we could keep this pattern.

@distantnative
Copy link
Member Author

session::storage seems good to me - @bastianallgeier also ok?

@lukasbestle
Copy link
Member

I think we should also use the opportunity and rename storage to content::storage in the v5/develop branch before the RC.

@bastianallgeier
Copy link
Member

I like the idea to reuse the :: naming pattern and I agree that we should use it for content as well.

@bastianallgeier bastianallgeier merged commit 04a6e2e into develop-minor Feb 3, 2025
13 checks passed
@bastianallgeier bastianallgeier deleted the enhancement/session-store-component branch February 3, 2025 09:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants