Notify users that the page has been updated and incite a reload

[mrmir]

https://community.openproject.org/projects/openproject/work_packages/56801

---

Documenting the new component and using it to replace streamable_flash_banner will be done in https://community.openproject.org/projects/openproject/work_packages/56802

[toy]

Looks good overall, just few notes code wise, also when testing I noticed a problematic issue, as the flash is shown also following my own actions on the page, which will be very confusing, at least it does for adding/removing/renaming sections. I am thinking only of some way of section/agenda item actions to update the checksum in stimulus controller if it is still the same as one that we have.

Was Action cable considered, or is this use "too much" to start using Action cable in the project?

[oliverguenther]

Looks good overall, just few notes code wise, also when testing I noticed a problematic issue, as the flash is shown also following my own actions on the page, which will be very confusing, at least it does for adding/removing/renaming sections. I am thinking only of some way of section/agenda item actions to update the checksum in stimulus controller if it is still the same as one that we have.

We missed updating the meeting from the service update, which resulted in the incorrect header being updated. This appears to be fixed now, although we are aware with this approach of using dependent values that we'll likely miss more cases where the dialog accidentally triggers. That's one reason why it's still behind a feature flag for now.

Was Action cable considered, or is this use "too much" to start using Action cable in the project?

We want to introduce ActionCable as soon as we can use the PostgreSQL adapter. I believe that this is now possible with Turbo 8, but someone would have to take a look at the exact details.

[toy]

Looks good overall, just few notes code wise, also when testing I noticed a problematic issue, as the flash is shown also following my own actions on the page, which will be very confusing, at least it does for adding/removing/renaming sections. I am thinking only of some way of section/agenda item actions to update the checksum in stimulus controller if it is still the same as one that we have.

We missed updating the meeting from the service update, which resulted in the incorrect header being updated. This appears to be fixed now, although we are aware with this approach of using dependent values that we'll likely miss more cases where the dialog accidentally triggers. That's one reason why it's still behind a feature flag for now.

I only understood now that the updating I mentioned was already there, done through turbo stream.

MeetingSectionsController has update_header_component_via_turbo_stream only in update and move, so create, destroy and drop still need it.

Also I noticed that MeetingAgendaItemsController#move calls move_item_within_section_via_turbo_stream and update_header_component_via_turbo_stream, but move_item_within_section_via_turbo_stream already includes call to update_header_component_via_turbo_stream.

[toy]

There is still a way to miss changes due to polling which can be easily displayed by moving sections, and I also saw a problem with the state of sections.

1. Create 3 sections (named a, b, c) and open it in two windows
2. Next should be done quickly, in first window tell section a to move to bottom, and in the second window tell section b to move to bottom
3. After poll first window gets the reload flash, but second does not

Problem with state is that in second window despite the order being a, c, b, the actions for moving are correctly updated, so section a shows actions to move to top and bottom, section c shows only actions to move to bottom and section b shows only actions to move to top.

[oliverguenther]

@toy we address the remarks regarding the header. For the quick subsequent reorders, we opened an open point since it's inherent to the way section reordering works with acts_as_list (not sending the full order to the backend, but only updating parts of it).

Discussion for that continues in https://community.openproject.org/work_packages/57331

If you agree, we'd like to merge this in

[toy]

I agree, it is anyway behind a feature flag. I commented on the way it is added when checking on it