Refactor Timeline Event Form

What does this MR do and why?

Timeline Event form was using an input within DatePicker unnecessarily, this is removed now and props updated appropriately.

The only other change made here is to move the style wrapping the timeline form to create_timeline_event so that timeline_events_form only contains the form making it easier to style when it will be reused for edit_timeline_event

This MR is part of a series of 5 MRs:

graph TD;
A[Add Edit Timeline Event Functionality] --> B[Refactor Timeline Event Form];
A[Add Edit Timeline Event Functionality] --> C[Refactor timeline event list];
A[Add Edit Timeline Event Functionality] --> D[Refactor timeline events list tests];
B[Refactor Timeline Event Form] --> E[Split Create timeline event from Timeline Event form];

The links are:

• Add Edit Timeline Event Functionality !95061 (merged)
• Refactor Timeline Event Form !94899 (merged) (you are here)
• Refactor timeline event list !95073 (merged)
• Refactor timeline events list tests !95046 (merged)
• Split Create timeline event from Timeline Event form !93545 (merged)

Screenshots or screen recordings

	before	after
without events
with events

How to set up and validate locally

Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.

1. Within a project on the left hand menu bar navigate to Monitor > Incidents
2. Open an incident (create one if needed)
3. Using the tab headings, select Timeline
4. Create a timeline entry if there isnt one
5. On the right hand side of the timeline event select edit from the more options symbol

MR acceptance checklist

This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

• I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.

Related to #344060 (closed)

changed milestone to %15.3

added Deliverable UX backend backend complete devopsmonitor frontend grouprespond missed-deliverable missed:14.6 missed:15.1 missed:15.2 sectionops typefeature workflowin review labels

assigned to @jrushford

Please wait for Reviewer Roulette to suggest a designer for UX review, and then assign them as Reviewer. This helps evenly distribute reviews across UX.

This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.

Suggested Reviewers (beta)

The individuals below may be good candidates to participate in the review based on various factors.

You can use slash commands in comments to quickly assign /assign_reviewer @user1.

Suggested Reviewers
@alyubenkov, @rkadam3, @ntepluhina, @agarciatesares, @vitallium

If you do not believe these suggestions are useful, please apply the label Bad Suggested Reviewer. You can also provide feedback for this feature on this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/357923.

Automatically generated by Suggested Reviewers Bot - an experimental ML-based recommendation engine created by ~"group::applied ml".

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
frontend	Axel García (@agarciatesares) (UTC-4, 6 hours behind @jrushford)	Andrew Fontaine (@afontaine) (UTC-4, 6 hours behind @jrushford)
UX	Philip Joyce (@philipjoyce) (UTC+1, 1 hour behind @jrushford)	Maintainer review is optional for UX

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Generated by Danger

@dzubova After !93545 (merged) is merged, this is next in line to be merged. Would you mind reviewing it since you have the context from !93545 (merged) already? There will be another MR to follow this actually adding the edit functionality.

This MR is set to be merged into 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form so that it is easier to compare the changes, but it will actually be merged to master after 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form is merged. Is this the correct way to set this up?

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

review-qa-blocking: test report for 0f061b79

expand test summary

+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                                     suites summary                                      |
+------------------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|                                    | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+------------------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Create                             | 28     | 0      | 1       | 10    | 29    | ❗     |
| Plan                               | 47     | 0      | 1       | 27    | 48    | ❗     |
| Verify                             | 12     | 0      | 1       | 10    | 13    | ❗     |
| Feature flag handler sanity checks | 9      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 9     | ✅     |
| Manage                             | 46     | 0      | 3       | 22    | 49    | ❗     |
| Configure                          | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Protect                            | 2      | 0      | 0       | 2     | 2     | ❗     |
| Package                            | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Secure                             | 2      | 0      | 0       | 2     | 2     | ❗     |
| Version sanity check               | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
+------------------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total                              | 146    | 0      | 9       | 73    | 155   | ❗     |
+------------------------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

added 1 commit

• caae7536 - Add missing self closing tag on datepicker

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 96efe57f - Rename varible for easier reading

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• 42da2ea9 - Fix mistake on function name

Compare with previous version

added 732 commits

• 42da2ea9...153a1db5 - 725 commits from branch 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form
• 59f64dbc - Refactor timeline event form
• 33f5b145 - Remove unused props
• 862aeaf4 - Fix failing tests
• 8aa75b1f - Add missing self closing tag on datepicker
• cfe0c176 - Rename varible for easier reading
• b23df716 - Fix mistake on function name
• 01294d99 - Fix merge mistakes

Compare with previous version

added 1 commit

• fc8679a8 - Revert name change of eventDetails

Compare with previous version

mentioned in merge request !93545 (merged)

marked the checklist item I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR. as completed

@jrushford - please see the following guidance and update this merge request.

	1 Warning
	Please add a subtype label to this merge request.

If you have added a type label and do not feel the purpose of this merge request matches one of the subtypes labels, please resolve this discussion.

changed target branch from 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form to master

changed target branch from master to 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form

deleted the 344060-split-create-timeline-event-from-form branch. This merge request now targets the master branch

added 903 commits

• fc8679a8...be27e8dc - 902 commits from branch master
• 236348fc - Refactor timeline event form

Compare with previous version

added maintenancerefactor label

added typemaintenance label and removed typefeature label

resolved all threads

resolved all threads

requested review from @tristan.read

Could you please review @tristan.read

Bundle size analysis [beta]

This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 50e871a8 and 0f061b79

Special assets

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
average	3.59 MB	3.6 MB	-	0.0 %
mainChunk	1.98 MB	1.98 MB	-	-0.0 %

Significant Growth: 1

Expand

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
pages.search.show	290.8 KB	313.15 KB	+22.35 KB	7.7 %

New entry points: 1

Expand

Entrypoint / Name	Size before	Size after	Diff	Diff in percent
pages.projects.google_cloud.databases	0 Bytes	835.65 KB	+835.65 KB	100.0 %

---

Your MR has at least one entrypoint growing significantly (more > 1 KB or 2%). If you write new or extend existing features, this is expected and there is nothing to worry about.

Please consider pinging someone from the FE Foundations (@dmishunov, @justin_ho, @mikegreiling or @nmezzopera) for review, if you are unsure about the size increase.

Please look at the full report for more details

---

Read more about how this report works.

Generated by Danger

mentioned in merge request !95061 (merged)

added 129 commits

• 236348fc...c530a80c - 128 commits from branch master
• 6dcdfb04 - Refactor timeline event form

Compare with previous version

approved this merge request

removed review request for @tristan.read

@tristan.read, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline has been started.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

• rspec minimal jobs
• jest minimal jobs
• merging a merge request.

requested review from @afontaine

removed missed:14.6 label

mentioned in merge request !95632 (merged)

This looks pretty good @jrushford but I have a little more clean-up for you to consider.

Apologies if this is done in one of the later MRs.

removed review request for @afontaine

requested review from @afontaine

added 1 commit

• 0fd9c684 - Apply MR review suggestions

Compare with previous version

changed milestone to %15.4

added missed:15.3 label

added 1 commit

• fff20ef6 - Apply MR suggestion to Date input

Compare with previous version

added 479 commits

• fff20ef6...50e35a2f - 476 commits from branch master
• 2ba88bd1 - Refactor timeline event form
• 208ab997 - Apply MR review suggestions
• 0f061b79 - Apply MR suggestion to Date input

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

This looks great, thanks @jrushford

approved this merge request

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 7caea2f8 succeeds

merged

mentioned in commit 8d22003a

added workflowstaging-canary label and removed workflowin review label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label

added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label

added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label

added releasedcandidate label