docs: ADR for in context discussions

Author: xitij2000

openedx/core/djangoapps/discussions/docs/decisions/0004-in-context-discussions-linking.rst

@@ -0,0 +1,137 @@
+Linking In-Context Discussions to Units
+=======================================
+
+
+Status
+------
+
+Proposal
+
+
+Context
+-------
+
+As part of the BD-38 initiative (Blended Development, Project 38), we are
+investigating a new way to set up discussions for a course that tries to
+simplify the way discussions are configured and ties them more closely to the
+course structure.
+
+The first simplification that the new system makes is to remove the
+discussions XBlock, and instead supports simply marking individual units
+as discussable, in which case a discussion UI will show up in-context.
+
+Currently this will only be supported for the edX Forums internal
+discussion provider, but it could be extended in the future to support
+other providers.
+
+In addition to providing a way to mark Units as discussable, there will
+also be a way to simply enable discussion for all units in the course.
+One further control provided here will be to toggle discussions on or
+off for graded discussions.
+
+Finally, it will also be possible to group discussions at a Sequence
+level instead of the Unit level.
+
+
+Requirements
+------------
+
+In order to enable in-context discussions with the above features we
+need a way to:
+
+- Mark a Unit as discussable
+- Store configuration options for discussions
+- Automatically mark/unmark units as discussable when settings change
+- Associate a unit with a corresponding discussion id
+- Make this discussion ID available via an API
+
+
+Consideration
+-------------
+
+Most of these configuration entries would be right at home in the
+`DiscussionsConfiguration` model in `plugin_settings`, however since they need
+to be available during course import-export, they should be stored in the
+course object itself.
+
+There is already a way to associate a discussion ID with a Discussion XBlock
+using its usage key. This same mechanism can be used to associate a Unit usage
+key with a corresponding discussion id.
+
+However the current mechanism has a few issues. It is stored as a JSON
+structure in the `DiscussionsIdMapping` model which has course id and a mapping
+of the discussion id to the xblock usage key in a single dict.
+
+This is OK for the existing setup because this is just a caching mechanism and
+the source of truth for this mapping is the XBlock itself, which stores the
+discussion id. On course publish this information is cached to
+`DiscussionsIdMapping`.
+
+For the new discussions system though, this mapping would be the source of
+truth for the link between discussions and units, so we should use a model
+where each such link is encoded as a row in the database.
+
+Decision
+--------
+
+Since the discussions settings need to be stored in the course structure we
+should create a new JSON structure in the course that matches the structure
+of `plugin_settings`. This can then be used to store not just the settings
+for the inbuilt discussions provider, but for any discussions provider in the
+future.
+
+When a course is published, we can copy over all the `plugin_settings` to the
+course in a JSON field called `dicussions_settings` with the following
+structure:
+
+.. code-block:: JSON
+
+    {
+        "discussions_enable_in_context": bool,
+        "discussions_enable_graded_units": bool,
+        "discussions_custom_visibility": bool,
+        "edx-next": {
+            "discussions_group_at_subsection": bool,
+        }
+    }
+
+The `edx-next` key here represents the provider id, allowing for potentially
+multiple provider configs to coexist in case of switching providers etc.
+Settings outside this key are those that are applicable to all providers. Note
+that they may not be supported by all providers though, in which case they will
+simply be ignored.
+
+To store Unit-level discussions settings, we can simply add a boolean field
+to the Unit block that specifies whether it is discussable or not. To be
+consistent with the above names we can call this field `discussions_enabled`.
+
+A signal can be created using the new Hooks extension system proposed in OEP-50
+that is triggered when discussions settings change. This signal can encapsulate
+all the data needed for setting up discussions from the modulestore. It can
+traverse through all teh Units in the course that match the criterion from the
+dicussions settings and provide the needed details as part of the signal data.
+
+A handler for the above signal, we create the discussion topics in
+`cs_comments_service` and add a mapping. If an existing unit with discussions
+is removed, we will disable the link but not delete the data.
+
+The discussion grouping at subsections will simply combine the topics from all
+the units in the subsection and provide a unified view across the subsection.
+This setting will mainly be ignored and will likely only be used by the APIs
+or potentially the frontend directly.
+
+The mapping between discussion ids and units is also a very simple model:
+
+.. code-block:: python
+
+    class DiscussionTopicLink:
+        course_key: CourseKey
+        usage_key: UsageKey
+        title: str
+        group_id: int
+        discussion_provider_id: str
+        external_discussion_id: str
+        enabled: bool
+
+This structure is generic on purpose, to allow using this model for other
+providers in the future, and for switching providers without data loss.