Replace Petitions Dashboard widget API about classicpress

[viktorix]

@bahiirwa there are a few reasons not to use GitHub API directly:

1. Privacy. Main issue. GitHub API will log all requests. Users wouldn't even know they're sharing their IP with GitHub.
2. Maintenance of the widget. Just like now, if we need to freeze API results to make changes to the widget, we wouldn't be able to do it since we wouldn't have control over the API.
3. Gives us more control over what we can do with the data.
4. GitHub API returns a lot of unnecessary data. So we can clean it up and return only the necessary data for the widget to work.

[bahiirwa]

We can't have CP websites requesting data from GitHub API directly.

Could your throw more light on this?

This is because we shall be making a redirect/"reverse proxy" of sort. Unless we choose to save this information in some place before distributing it.

[viktorix]

I've made some progress on the feature request widget. I've modified HTML/CSS while still using old API data:

[viktorix]

We need to modify JSON generator script to get data from GitHub, which is triggered periodically using a cronjob.

The following is a proposed JSON format based on the current API:

{
    "recent": {
        "data": [{
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "open",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            },
            {
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "open",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            }
        ]
    },
    "in-progress": {
        "data": [{
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "needs-pr",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            },
            {
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "has-pr",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            }
        ]
    },
    "help-wanted": {
        "data": [{
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "open",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            },
            {
                "title": "items->{}->title",
                "status": "open",
                "link": "items->{}->url"
            }
        ]
    },
    "link": "https://github.com/ClassicPress/ClassicPress/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3A%22type%3A+feature+request%22"
}

Categorization

We have 3 categories: recent, in-progress, and help wanted

recent

Pull the most recent 10 open issues using the label "type: feature request" and the following statuses:

• status: discussion
• status: on hold
• status: need more info
• status: needs decision

When passing status label to the JSON file, please remove "status: ".

https://api.github.com/search/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22type%3A+feature+request%22+repo:classicpress/classicpress

in progress

Pull open issues labeled "type: feature request" and the following statuses:

• status: has pr
• status: needs pr
• status: research plugin
• status: needs test
• status: needs review
• status: community reviewed

When passing status label to the JSON file, please remove "status: ".

https://api.github.com/search/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22type%3A+feature+request%22+repo:classicpress/classicpress

help wanted

Pull the latest 10 open issues with label "help wanted".
When passing status label to the JSON file, please remove "status: ".

https://api.github.com/search/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22help+wanted%22+repo:classicpress/classicpress

[bahiirwa]

Thank you for the well detailed requirement. This comment might need to be an issue on APIs repo.

However, We need to keep the current issue for the dashboard modification in core.

[mattyrob]

Please can we have a progress report on this proposal.

Is there a possibility of a PR soon? 1.5.0 is nearing Release Candidate phase, without a PR soon we may need to consider deferring this until 1.6.0.

[viktorix]

@mattyrob bump it to 1.6.0. This requires API changes that haven't been implemented yet.