Component Sidebar: Details Tab

[jmakowski1123]

To be completed after: #1045

1. The Details Tab contains a free-text field for users to enter a description of the content.
2. Field for content type
3. Links to courses where the component is being used
4. Time stamp for last modified
5. Time stamp for created

Out of scope: The "Creator" of the component is excluded for now (not stored anywhere) discussion

[rpenido]

Hi @bradenmacdonald!

3. Links to courses where the component is being used

Just to confirm, I think this is out of scope for Epic 3.
We need #1185 to have this info, right?

[bradenmacdonald]

@rpenido That's right.

[rpenido]

Hi @bradenmacdonald! I have another doubt that I want to confirm here:

1. The Details Tab contains a free-text field for users to enter a description of the content.

It doesn't seem that the XBlock has a description field, and currently, we are rendering the content in the Component Card.
Should we change it and use a new description meta field?

[bradenmacdonald]

@rpenido Yes, the plan was to have the description field that can override the one that comes from the content. Setting the description doesn't change the XBlock [fields] at all - it's only a change in the library metadata.

But I think we thought at the time that ComponentVersion had a description field and now I see that it doesn't. @ormsbee or @kdmccormick do you remember what we discussed about this? Should we add a description field to Component or ComponentVersion or punt this for now?

[ormsbee]

Asked for clarifications in Slack, but my off-the-cuff take is that the description is a field on a new model that's 1:1 with Component–mostly because a lot of queries will potentially join against Component, and I'd be worried about the descriptions text coming across the wire by default for all of them. (I realize we can defer fields in the queryset, but I worry about other things that hang off of ComponentVersion not realizing how careful they have to be about that in their RelatedManagers.)

[rpenido]

@jmakowski1123 @lizc577 @sdaitzman @marcotuts This is ready for AC testing on the sandbox.

[jmakowski1123]

I'm not following the conversation above. What happened with the component description field? It
s not displaying in the sandbox? Neither is the component type field?

[bradenmacdonald]

@jmakowski1123 Short answer: We didn't implement a description field yet. We can, but it's not an easy lift as I had earlier assumed so I suggest postponing it unless it's high priority. We also didn't implement the "Component Type" field but that's very easy to add.

[jmakowski1123]

Got it. The rest of the tab looks good.