Add extended graph and dummy auto-layout #59 by handreyrc · Pull Request #77 · serverlessworkflow/editor

handreyrc · 2026-04-13T22:59:37Z

Closes #59

Summary

This PR adds dummy auto-layout and extended graph types.

Changes

Added custom graph implementation with extended types to support:
- Node size
- Node position
- Edge types (DEFAULT, ERROR and CONDITION)
- Edge waypoints
Added buildGraph function to sdk wrapper
Added dummy auto-layout with fixed coordinates
Tests for extended graph types
Test for dummy auto-layout

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds SDK graph generation support to the diagram editor core by introducing extended graph types (node size/position, edge types/waypoints), exposing a buildGraph wrapper, and providing a dummy auto-layout implementation with accompanying tests/snapshots.

Changes:

Added extended graph type definitions and edge-type enrichment (solveEdgeTypes).
Exposed buildGraph via the core SDK wrapper and re-exported core modules.
Added a dummy applyAutoLayout implementation plus integration/unit tests and snapshots.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 10 changed files in this pull request and generated 9 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/fixtures/workflows.ts	Added new JSON/YAML workflow fixtures used by graph + auto-layout tests.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/workflowSdk.integration.test.ts	Added integration coverage for `buildGraph` and extended graph typing/snapshot.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts	New unit tests for edge type enrichment across default/error/condition/nested cases.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/autoLayout.integration.test.ts	New integration test verifying dummy auto-layout positions/sizes and snapshot.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/snapshots/workflowSdk.integration.test.ts.snap	Snapshot for `buildGraph` result.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/snapshots/autoLayout.integration.test.ts.snap	Snapshot for `applyAutoLayout` result.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/workflowSdk.ts	Switched to SDK namespace import; added `buildGraph` wrapper returning extended graph.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/index.ts	Re-exported `graph` and `autoLayout` modules.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/graph.ts	Added extended graph types and `solveEdgeTypes`.
packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/autoLayout.ts	Added dummy `applyAutoLayout` implementation to set size/position.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/graph.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/fixtures/workflows.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/graph.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/autoLayout.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/fixtures/workflows.ts

lornakelly

Thanks for PR Handrey, nice work. Just a few comments

lornakelly · 2026-04-14T11:54:33Z

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/workflowSdk.ts

 }
+
+export function buildGraph(model: sdk.Specification.Workflow): ExtendedGraph {
+  return solveEdgeTypes(sdk.buildGraph(model));


Wondering should we wrap this in a try/catch in case sdk buildGraph throws and maybe worth splitting into 2 steps first call sdk.buildGraph(model) and get result and then pass to solveEdgeTypes? wdyt?

@lornakelly,

The buildGraph is an extension of the original function in the SDK. A try/catch would just catch the exception and throw the same exception to the caller to be handled. I think we should leave the exception handling to the callers. Same as using the original method from the skd.
WDYT?

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts

lornakelly · 2026-04-14T12:03:10Z

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts

+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+


Would be good to have some negative test cases as well?

@lornakelly
The code that builds the graph is actually in the sdk, so we should trust it from the perspective of the editor's components. We are just adding some properties on top of it.

WDYT?

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/README.md

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/graph.ts

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/src/core/autoLayout.ts

Signed-off-by: handreyrc <handrey.cunha@gmail.com>

Copilot

Pull request overview

Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-04-14T21:07:06Z

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/workflowSdk.integration.test.ts

+    const { model } = parseWorkflow(BASIC_VALID_WORKFLOW_JSON_TASKS);
+    expect(model).not.toBeNull();


This buildGraph integration test uses parseWorkflow but doesn't assert that errors is empty before calling buildGraph(model!). Since parseWorkflow includes SDK validation, the test should explicitly check there are no validation errors to avoid masking fixture/SDK regressions.

Suggested change

const { model } = parseWorkflow(BASIC_VALID_WORKFLOW_JSON_TASKS);

expect(model).not.toBeNull();

const { model, errors } = parseWorkflow(BASIC_VALID_WORKFLOW_JSON_TASKS);

expect(model).not.toBeNull();

expect(errors).toHaveLength(0);

Copilot · 2026-04-14T21:07:07Z

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/autoLayout.integration.test.ts

+    const graph = buildGraph(result.model!);
+


In this test, parseWorkflow can return a non-null model and validation errors. Since the test is asserting behavior on a "valid" workflow graph, it should also assert result.errors is empty (and avoid relying on model!) to prevent silently passing with an invalid fixture/SDK validation failure.

Suggested change

const graph = buildGraph(result.model!);

expect(result.errors).toEqual([]);

expect(result.model).toBeDefined();

if (!result.model) {

throw new Error("Expected parseWorkflow to return a model for a valid workflow fixture.");

}

const graph = buildGraph(result.model);

Copilot · 2026-04-14T21:07:07Z

packages/serverless-workflow-diagram-editor/tests/core/graph.test.ts

+    const { model } = parseWorkflow(BASIC_VALID_WORKFLOW_JSON_TASKS);
+    expect(model).not.toBeNull();
+
+    const graph = buildGraph(model!);
+    expect(graph).not.toBeNull();


These tests treat the workflows as valid inputs to buildGraph, but they only check model and ignore parseWorkflow(...).errors. Since parseWorkflow performs SDK validation, please assert errors is empty (and only then call buildGraph) so the graph edge-type assertions don't pass when validation fails for the fixture.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 13, 2026 22:59

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of handreyrc April 13, 2026 23:00 View session

handreyrc changed the title ~~Add extendended graph and dummy auto-layout #59~~ Add extended graph and dummy auto-layout #59 Apr 13, 2026

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

handreyrc force-pushed the add-graph branch from a39d614 to b06e5fe Compare April 13, 2026 23:42

handreyrc requested review from fantonangeli, kumaradityaraj and lornakelly April 13, 2026 23:49

lornakelly reviewed Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

handreyrc force-pushed the add-graph branch from b06e5fe to 667e915 Compare April 14, 2026 20:42

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 14, 2026 20:42

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of handreyrc April 14, 2026 20:43 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

handreyrc force-pushed the add-graph branch from 667e915 to a5f0557 Compare April 14, 2026 20:56

Add extended graph types

4a4db49

Signed-off-by: handreyrc <handrey.cunha@gmail.com>

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 14, 2026 21:03

handreyrc force-pushed the add-graph branch from a5f0557 to 4a4db49 Compare April 14, 2026 21:03

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of handreyrc April 14, 2026 21:03 View session

handreyrc requested a review from lornakelly April 14, 2026 21:06

Copilot AI reviewed Apr 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

		const { model } = parseWorkflow(BASIC_VALID_WORKFLOW_JSON_TASKS);
		expect(model).not.toBeNull();

-    const graph = buildGraph(result.model!);
+    expect(result.errors).toEqual([]);
+    expect(result.model).toBeDefined();
+    if (!result.model) {
+      throw new Error("Expected parseWorkflow to return a model for a valid workflow fixture.");
+    }
+    const graph = buildGraph(result.model);

Conversation

handreyrc commented Apr 13, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary

Changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lornakelly left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lornakelly Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

handreyrc Apr 14, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lornakelly Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

handreyrc Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

handreyrc commented Apr 13, 2026 •

edited

Loading

handreyrc Apr 14, 2026 •

edited

Loading