Skip to content

Conversation

@ivan-ottinger
Copy link
Contributor

@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger commented Jan 22, 2026

Related issues

Proposed Changes

  • add user-friendly error messages when Blueprint deeplink open fails
  • add related tests
Before After
CleanShot 2026-01-23 at 10 53 59@2x CleanShot 2026-01-29 at 14 02 40@2x
CleanShot 2026-01-23 at 10 49 15@2x CleanShot 2026-01-29 at 14 04 33@2x

Testing Instructions

  1. Check out the PR branch and build the app with npm install && npm start.
  2. Try opening first two broken Blueprint deeplinks at https://jsbin.com/kulaqijega/1/edit?html,css,output or try these:
## "Please check the link and try again." (non-network errors)

# Invalid base64 JSON (parse failure)
wp-studio://add-site?blueprint=bm90LXZhbGlkLWpzb24=

# Invalid blueprint URL (malformed URL)
wp-studio://add-site?blueprint_url=not-a-url

# Valid JSON but invalid blueprint schema
wp-studio://add-site?blueprint=eyJmb28iOiJiYXIifQ==

## "Could not connect to the server..." (network error)

# Non-existent host (ENOTFOUND)
wp-studio://add-site?blueprint_url=https%3A%2F%2Fthis-domain-does-not-exist-xyz123.example%2Fblueprint.json
  1. Both should open an user-friendly error message with option to see the exact error message in the Studio app logs.

Pre-merge Checklist

  • Have you checked for TypeScript, React or other console errors?

@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger self-assigned this Jan 22, 2026
@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger force-pushed the update/blueprint-deeplink-error-messages branch from 0a1bc13 to 9c76a87 Compare January 23, 2026 10:04
@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger marked this pull request as ready for review January 23, 2026 10:05
@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger requested a review from a team January 23, 2026 10:05
Copy link
Contributor

@epeicher epeicher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks @ivan-ottinger for improving this! I have tested it, and I can see the new error messages.

Although I'm not sure I like the double Failed to load Blueprint and then The Blueprint could not be loaded. and not displaying the returned error message. I would be interested in others' views on those

Network Error Invalid Blueprint error
Image Image

@katinthehatsite
Copy link
Contributor

Although I'm not sure I like the double Failed to load Blueprint and then The Blueprint could not be loaded. and not displaying the returned error message. I would be interested in others' views on those

I agree with this assessment, although I think we don't necessarily need the exact error message in this window as as it will be in the logs as well. We should definitely adjust the repetitive wording though.

@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger force-pushed the update/blueprint-deeplink-error-messages branch from 9c76a87 to 642d282 Compare January 29, 2026 11:31
@wpmobilebot
Copy link

wpmobilebot commented Jan 29, 2026

📊 Performance Test Results

Comparing 2ddee34 vs trunk

site-editor

Metric trunk 2ddee34 Diff Change
load 2844.00 ms 2844.00 ms 0.00 ms ⚪ 0.0%

site-startup

Metric trunk 2ddee34 Diff Change
siteCreation 8065.00 ms 7076.00 ms -989.00 ms 🟢 -12.3%
siteStartup 3919.00 ms 3926.00 ms +7.00 ms 🔴 0.2%

Results are median values from multiple test runs.

Legend: 🟢 Improvement (faster) | 🔴 Regression (slower) | ⚪ No change

@ivan-ottinger ivan-ottinger force-pushed the update/blueprint-deeplink-error-messages branch from 21322bf to 4a205f0 Compare January 29, 2026 13:05
@ivan-ottinger
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you for your reviews, Kat & Roberto! I agree the message seemed redundant and have removed it in 4a205f0.

CleanShot 2026-01-29 at 14 02 40@2x

jsbin.com with the test links is down at the moment so I have added some more test links directly to the PR description (in case you would like to test the PR again). 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants