Skip to content

docs: Update setup instructions for Interactivity Router to include -variant flag#76830

Closed
juanmaguitar wants to merge 1 commit intotrunkfrom
worktree-iapi-docs-client-side-nav
Closed

docs: Update setup instructions for Interactivity Router to include -variant flag#76830
juanmaguitar wants to merge 1 commit intotrunkfrom
worktree-iapi-docs-client-side-nav

Conversation

@juanmaguitar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Updates the "Getting started with the Interactivity Router" section in the client-side navigation core concepts doc to recommend the --variant client-side-navigation scaffold variant.

Why?

@wordpress/create-block-interactive-template now ships a dedicated client-side-navigation variant that scaffolds a block with @wordpress/interactivity-router already wired up. The existing docs pointed to the base template command, which doesn't include the router setup — developers reading the client-side navigation guide would benefit from starting with the variant that matches their intent.

How?

Updated the scaffold command in the "Getting started with the Interactivity Router" section of core-concepts/client-side-navigation.md to include --variant client-side-navigation, and updated the surrounding prose to reflect that the variant includes both the Interactivity API and the router pre-configured.

Testing Instructions

  1. Read through the Client-Side Navigation core concept doc.
  2. Verify the scaffold command in the "Getting started with the Interactivity Router" section includes --variant client-side-navigation.
  3. Optionally, run the updated command locally and confirm the scaffolded block includes router configuration out of the box.

Testing Instructions for Keyboard

No UI changes — documentation only.

Screenshots or screencast

N/A — documentation-only change.

Use of AI Tools

This PR was drafted with Claude Code assistance. The content was reviewed and is the author's responsibility.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions bot commented Mar 26, 2026

The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the props-bot label.

If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.

Co-authored-by: juanmaguitar <juanmaguitar@git.wordpress.org>
Co-authored-by: luisherranz <luisherranz@git.wordpress.org>

To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Warning: Type of PR label mismatch

To merge this PR, it requires exactly 1 label indicating the type of PR. Other labels are optional and not being checked here.

  • Required label: Any label starting with [Type].
  • Labels found: .

Read more about Type labels in Gutenberg. Don't worry if you don't have the required permissions to add labels; the PR reviewer should be able to help with the task.

@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown

github-actions bot commented Mar 26, 2026

Flaky tests detected in 231803a.
Some tests passed with failed attempts. The failures may not be related to this commit but are still reported for visibility. See the documentation for more information.

🔍 Workflow run URL: https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/23635375248
📝 Reported issues:

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@luisherranz luisherranz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@juanmaguitar interestingly, I asked Copilot to open this PR a couple of weeks ago (and I added you as a reviewer, you must have missed it).

I approve this PR, but feel free to merge whichever one you prefer and close the other one.

@juanmaguitar
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

juanmaguitar commented Mar 27, 2026

I approve this PR, but feel free to merge whichever one you prefer and close the other one.

@luisherranz I have approved yours. I'll close this one in favour of #76543 👍

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.

2 participants