Rename models builder modes (#10272)

* Renaming AppData Models Builder mode

* Renaming PureLive Models Builder mode to Runtime

* ModelsBuilderAssembly attribute flags if models are "Live" or not

* Updated ModelsMode names

* Only add tag if it is not a pull request. Apparently this is not allowed when it is from a fork.

* Revert "Only add tag if it is not a pull request. Apparently this is not allowed when it is from a fork."

This reverts commit 92b33f3c

Co-authored-by: Bjarke Berg <mail@bergmania.dk>

src/Umbraco.Infrastructure/ModelsBuilder/AutoModelsNotificationHandler.cs

@@ -2,34 +2,39 @@ using System;
 using System.Threading;
 using Microsoft.Extensions.Logging;
 using Microsoft.Extensions.Options;
-using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Cache;
 using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Configuration.Models;
 using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Events;
 using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Notifications;
 using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Runtime;
 using Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder.Building;
 using Umbraco.Extensions;
+using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Configuration;
 
 namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder
 {
-    // supports LiveAppData - but not PureLive
-    public sealed class LiveModelsProvider : INotificationHandler<UmbracoApplicationStartingNotification>,
+    /// <summary>
+    /// Notification handlers used by <see cref="ModelsMode.SourceCodeAuto"/>.
+    /// </summary>
+    /// <remarks>
+    /// supports <see cref="ModelsMode.SourceCodeAuto"/> mode but not <see cref="ModelsMode.InMemoryAuto"/> mode.
+    /// </remarks>
+    public sealed class AutoModelsNotificationHandler : INotificationHandler<UmbracoApplicationStartingNotification>,
         INotificationHandler<UmbracoRequestEndNotification>,
         INotificationHandler<ContentTypeCacheRefresherNotification>,
         INotificationHandler<DataTypeCacheRefresherNotification>
     {
         private static int s_req;
-        private readonly ILogger<LiveModelsProvider> _logger;
+        private readonly ILogger<AutoModelsNotificationHandler> _logger;
         private readonly ModelsBuilderSettings _config;
         private readonly ModelsGenerator _modelGenerator;
         private readonly ModelsGenerationError _mbErrors;
         private readonly IMainDom _mainDom;
 
         /// <summary>
-        /// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="LiveModelsProvider"/> class.
+        /// Initializes a new instance of the <see cref="AutoModelsNotificationHandler"/> class.
         /// </summary>
-        public LiveModelsProvider(
-            ILogger<LiveModelsProvider> logger,
+        public AutoModelsNotificationHandler(
+            ILogger<AutoModelsNotificationHandler> logger,
             IOptions<ModelsBuilderSettings> config,
             ModelsGenerator modelGenerator,
             ModelsGenerationError mbErrors,
@@ -42,8 +47,8 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder
             _mainDom = mainDom;
         }
 
-        // we do not manage pure live here
-        internal bool IsEnabled => _config.ModelsMode.IsLiveNotPure();
+        // we do not manage InMemory models here
+        internal bool IsEnabled => _config.ModelsMode.IsAutoNotInMemory();
 
         /// <summary>
         /// Handles the <see cref="UmbracoApplicationStartingNotification"/> notification
@@ -74,6 +79,7 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder
             }
 
             _logger.LogDebug("Requested to generate models.");
+
             Interlocked.Exchange(ref s_req, 1);
         }
 

src/Umbraco.Infrastructure/ModelsBuilder/Building/Builder.cs

@@ -93,12 +93,12 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder.Building
         {
             TypeModel.MapModelTypes(_typeModels, ModelsNamespace);
 
-            var pureLive = Config.ModelsMode == ModelsMode.PureLive;
+            var isInMemoryMode = Config.ModelsMode == ModelsMode.InMemoryAuto;
 
             // for the first two of these two tests,
-            //  always throw, even in purelive: cannot happen unless ppl start fidling with attributes to rename
+            //  always throw, even in InMemory mode: cannot happen unless ppl start fidling with attributes to rename
             //  things, and then they should pay attention to the generation error log - there's no magic here
-            // for the last one, don't throw in purelive, see comment
+            // for the last one, don't throw in InMemory mode, see comment
 
             // ensure we have no duplicates type names
             foreach (var xx in _typeModels.GroupBy(x => x.ClrName).Where(x => x.Count() > 1))
@@ -118,12 +118,12 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder.Building
             {
                 foreach (var xx in typeModel.Properties.Where(x => x.ClrName == typeModel.ClrName))
                 {
-                    if (!pureLive)
+                    if (!isInMemoryMode)
                         throw new InvalidOperationException($"The model class for content type with alias \"{typeModel.Alias}\" is named \"{xx.ClrName}\"."
                             + $" CSharp does not support using the same name for the property with alias \"{xx.Alias}\"."
                             + " Consider using an attribute to assign a different name to the property.");
 
-                    // for purelive, will we generate a commented out properties with an error message,
+                    // in InMemory mode we generate commented out properties with an error message,
                     // instead of throwing, because then it kills the sites and ppl don't understand why
                     xx.AddError($"The class {typeModel.ClrName} cannot implement this property, because"
                         + $" CSharp does not support naming the property with alias \"{xx.Alias}\" with the same name as content type with alias \"{typeModel.Alias}\"."

src/Umbraco.Infrastructure/ModelsBuilder/Building/PropertyModel.cs

@@ -1,5 +1,6 @@
 using System;
 using System.Collections.Generic;
+using Umbraco.Cms.Core.Configuration;
 
 namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder.Building
 {
@@ -46,7 +47,7 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder.Building
         /// </summary>
         /// <remarks>This should be null, unless something prevents the property from being
         /// generated, and then the value should explain what. This can be used to generate
-        /// commented out code eg in PureLive.</remarks>
+        /// commented out code eg in <see cref="ModelsMode.InMemoryAuto"/> mode.</remarks>
         public List<string> Errors;
 
         /// <summary>

src/Umbraco.Infrastructure/ModelsBuilder/ModelsBuilderAssemblyAttribute.cs

@@ -9,10 +9,10 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder
     public sealed class ModelsBuilderAssemblyAttribute : Attribute
     {
         /// <summary>
-        /// Gets or sets a value indicating whether the assembly is a PureLive assembly.
+        /// Gets or sets a value indicating whether the assembly is a InMemory assembly.
         /// </summary>
-        /// <remarks>A Models Builder assembly can be either PureLive or normal Dll.</remarks>
-        public bool PureLive { get; set; }
+        /// <remarks>A Models Builder assembly can be either InMemory or a normal Dll.</remarks>
+        public bool IsInMemory { get; set; }
 
         /// <summary>
         /// Gets or sets a hash value representing the state of the custom source code files

src/Umbraco.Infrastructure/ModelsBuilder/UmbracoServices.cs

@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ namespace Umbraco.Cms.Infrastructure.ModelsBuilder
         {
             var types = new List<TypeModel>();
 
-            // TODO: this will require 3 rather large SQL queries on startup in PureLive. I know that these will be cached after lookup but it will slow
+            // TODO: this will require 3 rather large SQL queries on startup in ModelsMode.InMemoryAuto mode. I know that these will be cached after lookup but it will slow
             // down startup time ... BUT these queries are also used in NuCache on startup so we can't really avoid them. Maybe one day we can
             // load all of these in in one query and still have them cached per service, and/or somehow improve the perf of these since they are used on startup
             // in more than one place.