[#71896] Add semantic identifier support to project creation & editing on web

[thykel]

Ticket

https://community.openproject.org/projects/communicator-stream/work_packages/71896

What are you trying to accomplish?

We are currently adding support for "semantic work package identifiers".

• old-style numeric identifiers: project ID project-zeus / work package ID 1
• new-style semantic identifiers: project ID PZEUS / work package PZEUS-1.

This PR rewrites the "Change Project Identifier" functionality to support semantic identifiers.

• On the project settings page, replace the "Change Identifier" button (that previously lead to a separate setting page) with a new form field that consists of a read-only input box + a button that triggers a modal.
• Make the modal respect validations for both numeric-style IDs and semantic IDs (based on the administration setting)

Screenshots

What approach did you choose and why?

This PR also incorporates content of #22330 due to a faulty merge.

Merge checklist

• Added/updated tests
• Added/updated documentation in Lookbook (patterns, previews, etc)
• Tested major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Edge, ...)

[thykel]

I see there's still a useless vertical scrollbar in the modal alert & some missing whitespace in the main form -- will fix that soon. The rest should be good to review.

[github-actions]

Deploying openproject with ⚡ PullPreview

Field	Value
Latest commit	8439987
Job	deploy
Status	✅ Deploy successful
Preview URL	https://pr-22329-71896-change-ide-ip-188-245-84-157.my.opf.run:443

View logs

[akabiru]

Nice one- just a few remarks to consider

[akabiru]

🍏 nitpick: I would have expected to see the check Setting::WorkPackageIdentifier.alphanumeric? here- but I see this check Project.semantic_alphanumeric_identifier? includes a feature flag check as well. Still, I wonder if should overload the Project class or keep all (semantic) settings encapsulated within Setting::WorkPackageIdentifier esp as the feature flag should soon be removed

[thykel]

nitpick: I would have expected to see the check Setting::WorkPackageIdentifier.alphanumeric? here- but I see this check Project.semantic_alphanumeric_identifier? includes a feature flag check as well.

My original line of thinking was that we don't want someone do this:

1. Toggle feature flag on
2. Switch to alphanumeric
3. Toggle feature flag off
4. Encounter alphanumeric-specific behaviour in the form

But it's true that the sequence of 2. + 3. is gonna really mess up the app, and this guard is not really going to offer that much help.

Should we maybe prevent users from toggling the feature flag off while alphanumeric setting is still in effect? It's not like the blame would be on us (as it's an experimental feature), but it could make any future testing a bit more safe to execute.

[akabiru]

@thykel one UX issue to consider: with semantic identifiers enabled, and user attempts to "change identifier" without the Autofix job having ran/completed- they are not able to type unless they clear all input and start typing. In this scenario- I think the form should be rendered in an invalid state (with a validation message) so the user is made aware.

I understand this might be a moot point once we have the background job- that should already autofix things- but I reckon it's a good failsafe to have from a UX perspective.

https://pr-22329-71896-change-iden-ip-46-224-35-249.my.opf.run/projects/demo-project123/settings/general

[akabiru]

Nice one 💯. I only found a few issues that are worth clarifying before merge.

[akabiru]

🍏 if we can avoid overloading the /project/{id} finder route- I think that would be nice. To keep things simple, and not have to worry about clashes when user sets routing names as identifiers. (noting that we already have "reserved identifiers")

[akabiru]

🚢 🚢