feat: publicUi routes to not have cms-ui in public nonContentRoutes

[giuliaghisini]

if we have nonContentRoutes that aren't cms-ui,
for example '/search'
now are considered as cmsUi.
This adds unnecessary things to the page like:

• cms-ui class to the body tag

defining this public routes in config we can avoid this and everithing works well :-D

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for plone-components canceled.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	9f6e1e9
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/plone-components/deploys/66ed5ea3431a830008d6a44b

[stevepiercy]

Clean up news and comments, and a couple of questions.

[stevepiercy]

@plone/volto-team this PR needs a technical review.

[ichim-david]

@mamico @giuliaghisini This doesn't look ready for testing yet due to the unit test failure

[stevepiercy]

The failing CI check for readme-link-check is due to https://www.cmscom.jp not responding. @terapyon would you please look into this?

Otherwise it is all green, but could use one more round of reviews. @giuliaghisini would you please add your review? Thank you!

[ichim-david]

@mamico you've turned a bugfix into a breaking change. If you modify where the config is at it will need a breaking notice and an upgrade mention. I would wait for this action though to hear what @davisagli thinks about your proposal to move the config setting.
EDIT:
Was too quick to react, I've added a reply here #6173 (comment)

[giuliaghisini]

For docs, see https://6.docs.plone.org/volto/contributing/documentation.html.
@ichim-david as far as what to document and where, I don't see anything for nonContentRoutes in Routing (so sad), The configuration registry, or Settings reference guide. Would one of these be appropriate locations?

It would be good to get the setting documented and in the routing docs to link to the routing based settings

updated how-to file

[stevepiercy]

I expanded on @giuliaghisini's documentation. This should be reviewed by another contributor.

[stevepiercy]

Thanks for checking the docs @mamico.

I think we should do one more technical review, as @mamico changes made after @pnicolli. Maybe @davisagli can fill in, or @pnicolli with a second review? Other folks are on vacation for another week or two.

[davisagli]

I think this is okay for Volto 18. It's arguably a breaking change to backport it, since some existing sites may have styling that depends on the cms-ui class being there for these views.

[giuliaghisini]

@sneridagh could we merge this in volto 18?

[ichim-david]

@plone/volto-team I am +1 on having such a feature however I am not completely sold on the new setting name.
If the new option would share the same base it would be easier to find the extension.
I'm thinking of naming such as:
nonContentRoutesPublic
nonContentRoutesPublicUI
nonContentRoutesOfPublicUI

If we were to have good typescript integration I think that having the same base would make it easier to find every option used.
Maybe someone has an even better naming example or the majority decides that publicNonContentRoutes is good enough, I am not strongly against the current suggestion but again I am not 100% sold either :).

[stevepiercy]

I tend to follow the same naming convention suggested by @ichim-david in my projects: BaseNameOptionalModifier or base-name-optional-modifier. We did something similar for almost all of the make commands.

If a renaming refactor is done, I prefer the shorter proposed version nonContentRoutesPublic, as these are routes. I don't think the UI segment helps, as it is an implementation detail better described in code comments.

[giuliaghisini]

@stevepiercy @ichim-david @sneridagh
renamed var into nonContentRoutesPublic

i think it's ready now

[stevepiercy]

Thanks for the refactor! This LGTM, with a few minor comment suggestions. I could not understand two of them, so I made a best guess.

[stevepiercy]

Let's merge!

[stevepiercy]

I restarted the lincheck build as it had a temporary outage for a link.