Plugin: Document the project structure and conventions used in the lib folder for PHP code#39603
Plugin: Document the project structure and conventions used in the lib folder for PHP code#39603noisysocks merged 8 commits intotrunkfrom
lib folder for PHP code#39603Conversation
| are not ready to be merged to Core. | ||
| - `lib/stable` - Stable features that exist only in the plugin. They could one | ||
| day be merged to Core, but not yet. | ||
| - `lib/compat/wordpress-X.Y` - Stable features that are intended to be merged to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not suggesting we do it right away, but do you think it'd be helpful for folks if expanded the compat topic at some stage? For example rationale, preferred naming conventions when extending classes, things to test, and so on.
There are also plenty of lessons to draw from PRs such as #38883 and #38671
Or maybe it's just too fuzzy an area to pin down. 🌪️
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes absolutely. This should be a living document, like all our docs. I think we're still figuring a lot of that out, so it's hard to pen down right now. If you have any suggestions on things we can add now then please go ahead!
lib folder for PHP code
|
Thanks for editing @ramonjd! |
andrewserong
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks so much for starting this @noisysocks! I've just added a couple questions and a few tiny grammar suggestions, but this looks like a great start for a living document. Nice work!
| // lib/experimental/navigation/class-wp-navigation.php | ||
|
|
||
| if ( class_exists( 'WP_Navigation' ) ) { | ||
| return; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice, TIL you can call return at root level in a PHP file (i.e. not inside a function) to skip execution 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
PHP is pretty lawless.
tellthemachines
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for writing this up! It's clear and detailed and will make everyone's life easier 🎉
|
|
||
| ### Note how your feature should look when merged to Core | ||
|
|
||
| Developers should write a brief note about how their feature should be merged to Core, for example, which Core file or function should be patched. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This will help so much with backports to Core ⭐
|
Thanks for the proofreading and suggestions! I'll link to this in the #core-editor chat for awareness. Again, let's iterate on this document. The team is still figuring out a lot of it 😀 |
youknowriad
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Really cool addition, thanks Robert.
| function gutenberg_get_navigation( $slug ) { ... } | ||
| ``` | ||
|
|
||
| ### Group PHP code by _feature_ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I actually think the lib/compat folder should group its code by "core" php file. Meaning if the change needs to happen in edit-form-blocks.php in 5.9, I'd put it in lib/compat/5.9/edit-form-blocks.php and for new files, try to come up with the best file name that will suite core merge. In practice, this is also very close to "group by feature".
The main goal is to simplify the work for the person back porting.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The downside of that though is that you can't move features in and out of "experimental" status e.g. using git mv lib/experimental/cool-new-feature.php lib/compat/wordpress-6.0/cool-new-feature.php. Not sure if we do this in practice, mind you 😀
| ### Prefer the `wp` prefix | ||
|
|
||
| For features that may be merged to Core, it's best to use a `wp_` prefix for functions or a `WP_` prefix for classes. | ||
|
|
||
| This applies to both experimental and stable features. | ||
|
|
||
| Using the `wp_` prefix avoids us having to rename functions and classes from `gutenberg_` to `wp_` if the feature is merged to Core. | ||
|
|
||
| Functions that are intended solely for the plugin, e.g., plugin infrastructure, should use the `gutenberg_` prefix. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any thoughts on naming conventions for when we're updating a function from core?
For example, this change from https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/pull/38681/files?w=1#diff-089523f9c993d53f6f02926d28f7a80394d93740e7d16e47e17244547b2b8f5e. The core action is removed and the plugin action is added to replace it.
My intention with that change was that the gutenberg_ version of the function in the plugin would replace the wp_ version when porting to core. If we're reserving that prefix for things that should never go into core, we need another convention.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think we really have a good strategy for this kind of stuff. We have a similar nightmare with WP_Theme_JSON needing Gutenberg_Theme_JSON and WP_Theme_JSON_5_9 😅
Using gutenberg_ seems fine to me, though it will get tricky when the new gutenberg_ function makes it into WP 6.0 and we want to make more changes in 6.1 We won't be able to tell whether the wp_ function that exists is the 5.9 version or the 6.0 version.
…ib` folder for PHP code (WordPress#39603) * Add lib/README.md * Subediting * Formatting * Fix typo Co-authored-by: Daniel Richards <daniel.richards@automattic.com> * Clarify why we want the wp_ prefix * Reword sentence about hooking * Fix typo * Clarify that gutenberg_ is acceptable for infrastrucutre Co-authored-by: Ramon <ramonjd@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Daniel Richards <daniel.richards@automattic.com>
|
Thanks indeed! These changes helped me better understand the methodology and nuances of the PHP merging process! |
What?
Adds some documentation about our PHP file structure and some best practices when writing PHP.
Why?
I want to make @tellthemachines happy.
How?
I wrote it and have not proofread it at all. Please feel free to push changes. It's based off of the discussion in #33810 and my own gut feelings having merged PHP code from Gutenberg to Core a few times.
Testing Instructions
Read the file.