Feat/issue 2953 layout parity between calm hub and code plugin

[byrash]

Description

Type of Change

• 🐛 Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• ✨ New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• 💥 Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
• 📚 Documentation update
• 🎨 Code style/formatting changes
• ♻️ Refactoring (no functional changes)
• ⚡ Performance improvements
• ✅ Test additions or updates
• 🔧 Chore (maintenance, dependencies, CI, etc.)

Affected Components

• CLI (cli/)
• Schema (calm/)
• CALM AI (calm-ai/)
• CALM Hub (calm-hub/)
• CALM Hub UI (calm-hub-ui/)
• CALM Server (calm-server/)
• CALM Widgets (calm-widgets/)
• Documentation (docs/)
• Shared (shared/)
• VS Code Extension (calm-plugins/vscode/)
• Dependencies
• CI/CD

Commit Message Format ✅

Testing

• I have tested my changes locally
• I have added/updated unit tests
• All existing tests pass

Checklist

• My commits follow the conventional commit format
• I have updated documentation if necessary
• I have added tests for my changes (if applicable)
• My changes follow the project's coding standards

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: byrash / name: Shivaji Byrapaneni (3350c9b)

[byrash]

Addresses #2953

This supports both in Document & Layout in Calm Hub.

[byrash]

@markscott-ms @jpgough-ms Please let us know what you think. Thank You.

[rocketstack-matt]

Two blocking issues below (unsaved-edit data loss, missed container type in the reflow-skip check), plus two non-blocking design/scope notes.

Separately: issue #2953 is still open with an unresolved objection from @markscott-ms about persisting layout inside the architecture document at all, and no explicit design sign-off — worth settling there before this merges, independent of the code-level points below.

[byrash]

Two blocking issues below (unsaved-edit data loss, missed container type in the reflow-skip check), plus two non-blocking design/scope notes.

Separately: issue #2953 is still open with an unresolved objection from @markscott-ms about persisting layout inside the architecture document at all, and no explicit design sign-off — worth settling there before this merges, independent of the code-level points below.

Hello @rocketstack-matt , Appreciate your feedback. All the mentioned issues has now been resolved and change should be in PR soon.

Regarding layout, Our priority is to have uniform rendering of CALM Diagrams in all tools in CALM suite being it VS Code or Calm Hub or Calm docify rendered markdown files. As you are aware we have choose Git as the backend store which acts as the single source of truth for all the tools in CALM suite and works consistently. Hence having layout as part of calm file itself was a design decision chosen so that it renders in VS Code plugin, reading layout form calm file itself. We are happy for it to be external as long as its works consistent across all the tools. Until we have a solution that works meeting those needs, we have added this as a tactical solution to be able to support the ask.

@markscott-ms Can we add it as an item for our next WG item to discuss and brainstorm further on this matter, if required.

Many Thanks!

FYI: @jimthompson5802

[rocketstack-matt]

@byrash just flagging the failing build - happy to take another look once resolved.

[byrash]

@byrash just flagging the failing build - happy to take another look once resolved.

Build is all good now. Thanks!

[rocketstack-matt]

Both blocking items and both non-blocking items from my prior review are resolved and tested.

[byrash]

Hello @markscott-ms can we please merge this PR ? Many Thanks!