GDB-14779: Solr deprecation banner is not sticky by boyan-tonchev · Pull Request #3012 · Ontotext-AD/graphdb-workbench

boyan-tonchev · 2026-06-25T12:15:07Z

What

Kept the deprecation banner sticky together with the application header.
Added user preferences infrastructure for storing user-specific UI settings.
Implemented persistence of the Solr deprecation banner dismissed state for authenticated users.

Why

The deprecation banner was rendered outside of the sticky header container, causing it to scroll out of view instead of remaining visible with the header.
Users should not have to dismiss the Solr deprecation banner every time they visit the application when they are authenticated.
Anonymous users cannot be identified, so their dismissed state should be preserved only for the current browser session.

How

Moved the deprecation banner into the sticky header container so both the header and the banner remain fixed at the top while scrolling.
Introduced models, context, storage, and service classes for managing user-specific preferences.
Persisted the dismissed banner state per authenticated user while keeping the preference in memory for anonymous users.

Checklist

plamen-yordanov · 2026-06-26T08:40:55Z

+   * @returns {@code true} if preferences should be persisted.
+   */
+  private shouldPersistPreferences(): boolean {
+    return this.securityContextService.getSecurityConfig()?.enabled === true


you can use config.isEnabled()

plamen-yordanov · 2026-06-26T08:53:30Z

+   * @returns {@code true} if preferences should be persisted.
+   */
+  private shouldPersistPreferences(): boolean {
+    return this.securityContextService.getSecurityConfig()?.enabled === true


Without security enabled the user is an admin (or a repo manager if there is override auth). Shouldn't those be able to persist their preferences? If a user should be explicitly logged in, you can replace all of this with authentication.service#isLoggedIn

I will check this. If security is disabled and getIsLoggedIn() returns false, I'll change it.

I think we can go with logged in users only.

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T09:48:15Z

+/**
+ * Context service responsible for storing user-specific data for the current application session.
+ */
+export class UserContextService extends ContextService<UserContextFields> implements DeriveContextServiceContract<UserContextFields, UserContextFieldParams>, LifecycleHooks {


This must be UserPreferencesContextService

Initially, the name was UserPreferencesContextService, but I thought it could be used in the future for other user-related properties.

Renamed and moved

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T09:55:39Z

Why are these services in the domain package? They have nothing to do with the domains. Move them outside

I thought of them as user-related, so I placed them next to the user service. I'll rename UserPreferencesContextService and move them back to where they were.

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T09:59:31Z

+
+    return this.userPreferencesStorageService
+      .getUsersPreferences()
+      .getUserPreferences(username) ?? new UserPreferences();


This should be something like this

this.userPreferencesStorageService .getPreferences() .getPreferenceByUsername(username)

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T11:18:37Z

+  let securityContextService: jest.Mocked<SecurityContextService>;
+  let authenticationService: jest.Mocked<AuthenticationService>;
+
+  let storage: Record<string, string>;


We have a StorageMock. Why don't you use it?

Reimplemented

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T11:21:01Z

+  let authenticationService: jest.Mocked<AuthenticationService>;
+
+  let storage: Record<string, string>;
+  let context: Record<string, unknown>;


Why do you need to mock the context?! Why not just using the actual context service and just spy on it if you need.

Reimplemented

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T11:29:18Z

+
+    return this.userPreferencesStorageService
+      .getUsersPreferences()
+      .getUserPreferences(username);


this is still unchanged

svilenvelikov · 2026-06-26T11:52:24Z

+   * Indicates whether the user has dismissed the Solr deprecation banner.
+   * When {@code true}, the banner is not shown again for the user.
+   */
+  dismissSolrDeprecationBanner = false;


rename this to either dismissedSolrDeprecationBanner or isSolrDeprecationBannerDismissed

## What - Kept the deprecation banner sticky together with the application header. - Added user preferences infrastructure for storing user-specific UI settings. - Implemented persistence of the Solr deprecation banner dismissed state for authenticated users. ## Why - The deprecation banner was rendered outside of the sticky header container, causing it to scroll out of view instead of remaining visible with the header. - Users should not have to dismiss the Solr deprecation banner every time they visit the application when they are authenticated. - Anonymous users cannot be identified, so their dismissed state should be preserved only for the current browser session. ## How - Moved the deprecation banner into the sticky header container so both the header and the banner remain fixed at the top while scrolling. - Introduced models, context, storage, and service classes for managing user-specific preferences. - Persisted the dismissed banner state per authenticated user while keeping the preference in memory for anonymous users.

sonarqubecloud · 2026-06-26T14:38:17Z

Quality Gate passed for 'Shared-components'

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

boyan-tonchev force-pushed the GDB-14779-deprecate-banner-is-not-sticky branch 3 times, most recently from 1c684f0 to e29dc46 Compare June 26, 2026 08:35

plamen-yordanov reviewed Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

svilenvelikov reviewed Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

boyan-tonchev force-pushed the GDB-14779-deprecate-banner-is-not-sticky branch from e29dc46 to 131c05e Compare June 26, 2026 10:34

svilenvelikov reviewed Jun 26, 2026

View reviewed changes

boyan-tonchev force-pushed the GDB-14779-deprecate-banner-is-not-sticky branch from 131c05e to 8ca3896 Compare June 26, 2026 14:32

Uh oh!

Conversation

boyan-tonchev commented Jun 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What

Why

How

Checklist

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

plamen-yordanov Jun 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

svilenvelikov Jun 26, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Jun 26, 2026

Quality Gate passed for 'Shared-components'

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

boyan-tonchev commented Jun 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading

plamen-yordanov Jun 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading

svilenvelikov Jun 26, 2026 •

edited

Loading