[FND-198] Switch project’s type variant in background

[dfriquet]

Ticket

https://community.openproject.org/wp/FND-198

Stacked on #24540 (FND-109) — the base of this PR is that branch, so it needs to merge first. The diff here is the background execution only.

What are you trying to accomplish?

• Run a project's type-variant switch in a background job rather than in the request.

Feedback is in-place state on the type row — a spinner plus "Switching to variant: …", keyed on the project rather than the user, so a colleague who did not start it sees it too.

A job-status dialog was built as the alternative so the two could be compared. The designer chose the row indicator, so the last commit removes the dialog.

Screenshots

What approach did you choose and why?

• Debounce instead of WP count:
  • Relies on perceived user-time: the request waits up to a second for the job's status row to settle. That duration is arbitrary and the constant can be easily changed.
  • A first commit gated on a work package count (BACKGROUND_THRESHOLD); the debounce replaces it, since process time per WP can’t be steadily guessed.
• The row names the target variant on its own ("Switching to variant: Blueprint"), reusing the wording the settled row already uses rather than the composite name. Switching to the family parent leaves the project on no variant at all, so that case reads "Switching to:" instead.

Merge checklist

• Added/updated tests
• Added/updated documentation in Lookbook (patterns, previews, etc)
• Tested major browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Edge, ...) — Chrome only so far

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./spec/features/projects/create_spec.rb[1:12:3:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24559, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./spec/features/projects/create_spec.rb[1:12:3:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24559. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24559 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @dfriquet to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @dfriquet, and request a review from @dfriquet.
On every commit, set @dfriquet as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/wikis/spec/features/admin/internal_provider_spec.rb[1:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24559, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/wikis/spec/features/admin/internal_provider_spec.rb[1:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24559. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24559 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @dfriquet to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @dfriquet, and request a review from @dfriquet.
On every commit, set @dfriquet as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/overviews/spec/features/managing_dashboard_page_spec.rb[1:1:1]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24559, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/overviews/spec/features/managing_dashboard_page_spec.rb[1:1:1]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24559. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24559 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @dfriquet to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @dfriquet, and request a review from @dfriquet.
On every commit, set @dfriquet as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_multi_role_spec.rb[1:4:4:2]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24559, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_multi_role_spec.rb[1:4:4:2]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24559. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24559 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @dfriquet to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @dfriquet, and request a review from @dfriquet.
On every commit, set @dfriquet as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.

[github-actions]

Caution

The provided work package version does not match the core version

Details:

• Work package URL: https://community.openproject.org/wp/FND-198
• Work package version: Behind feature flag
• Core version: 17.8.0

Please make sure that:

• The work package version OR your pull request target branch is correct

[github-actions]

Warning

Flaky specs

• rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:2:1]
• rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:3:2:2:1:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/projects/create_spec.rb[1:12:3:2:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:1]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:2]
• rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:3]
• rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_spec.rb[1:4:4]

🤖 Ask Copilot to investigate

Copy the prompt below into a new comment on this PR to delegate the investigation to GitHub Copilot. It will look into the flakiness and open a separate pull request with you as reviewer.

@copilot The following spec(s) are flaky in CI (first seen on PR #24559, linked for reference only):

- `rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:2:1]`
- `rspec ./modules/gantt/spec/features/timeline/timeline_dates_spec.rb[1:3:2:2:1:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/projects/create_spec.rb[1:12:3:2:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:1]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:2]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/roles/report_spec.rb[1:3]`
- `rspec ./spec/features/workflows/edit_spec.rb[1:4:4]`

Treat this as a standalone task, unrelated to PR #24559. Create a new branch from origin/dev and open a new pull request targeting dev — do not stack it on PR #24559 or reuse that branch.

Follow the playbook in docs/development/testing/handling-flaky-tests/README.md to find the root cause and fix the underlying race — do not skip, delete, or weaken the spec to make it pass; disabling is a last resort per the playbook, and only with a bug ticket. Verify the fix by running the spec(s) repeatedly (e.g. `script/bulk_run_rspec --run-count 10`).

If you cannot reproduce the flake or are not confident in a fix after reasonable investigation, do not fabricate a change or skip the spec to force CI green. Instead, leave the pull request in draft and document what you tried, the suspected cause, and any leads in its description, then assign @dfriquet to take over.

Once the fix is verified, title the PR after the spec(s) it fixes, and use the PR description to explain the root cause, how the change resolves it, and the before/after results. Label the PR `flaky-spec`, assign @dfriquet, and request a review from @dfriquet.
On every commit, set @dfriquet as the sole co-author with a `Co-authored-by:` trailer (use their GitHub no-reply email so it links to their account), so it is traceable who dispatched the fix.