Fix Buttons inside Form blocks to not be full width on the front end

[tellthemachines]

Fixes #40268

Proposed changes:

• Adds an explicit width to the wp-block-button__link element on the front end (inside the block's view.scss file) to override the width: 100% rule coming from core. (The core rule was a fairly recent addition in Button Block: Apply Stretch Styles Correctly WordPress/gutenberg#64770)

Other information:

• Have you written new tests for your changes, if applicable?
• Have you checked the E2E test CI results, and verified that your changes do not break them?
• Have you tested your changes on WordPress.com, if applicable (if so, you'll see a generated comment below with a script to run)?

Jetpack product discussion

Does this pull request change what data or activity we track or use?

Testing instructions:

• Go to '..'
• Add a Jetpack Form block in a post, any variation.
• Make sure you have a theme enabled where the issue is reproducible, e.g. TT5.
• Publish the post and check the the Form Button doesn't stretch to full width on the front end.

Before:

After:

[github-actions]

Are you an Automattician? Please test your changes on all WordPress.com environments to help mitigate accidental explosions.

• To test on WoA, go to the Plugins menu on a WordPress.com Simple site. Click on the "Upload" button and follow the upgrade flow to be able to upload, install, and activate the Jetpack Beta plugin. Once the plugin is active, go to Jetpack > Jetpack Beta, select your plugin, and enable the fix/form-button-width branch.

• To test on Simple, run the following command on your sandbox:

  bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack fix/form-button-width
  

Interested in more tips and information?

• In your local development environment, use the jetpack rsync command to sync your changes to a WoA dev blog.
• Read more about our development workflow here: PCYsg-eg0-p2
• Figure out when your changes will be shipped to customers here: PCYsg-eg5-p2

[github-actions]

Thank you for your PR!

When contributing to Jetpack, we have a few suggestions that can help us test and review your patch:

• ✅ Include a description of your PR changes.
  
• ✅ Add a "[Status]" label (In Progress, Needs Team Review, ...).
  
• ✅ Add a "[Type]" label (Bug, Enhancement, Janitorial, Task).
  
• ✅ Add testing instructions.
  
• ✅ Specify whether this PR includes any changes to data or privacy.
  
• ✅ Add changelog entries to affected projects
  

This comment will be updated as you work on your PR and make changes. If you think that some of those checks are not needed for your PR, please explain why you think so. Thanks for cooperation 🤖

---

The e2e test report can be found here. Please note that it can take a few minutes after the e2e tests checks are complete for the report to be available.

---

Follow this PR Review Process:

1. Ensure all required checks appearing at the bottom of this PR are passing.
2. Choose a review path based on your changes:
   • A. Team Review: add the "[Status] Needs Team Review" label
     • For most changes, including minor cross-team impacts.
     • Example: Updating a team-specific component or a small change to a shared library.
   • B. Crew Review: add the "[Status] Needs Review" label
     • For significant changes to core functionality.
     • Example: Major updates to a shared library or complex features.
   • C. Both: Start with Team, then request Crew
     • For complex changes or when you need extra confidence.
     • Example: Refactor affecting multiple systems.
3. Get at least one approval before merging.

Still unsure? Reach out in #jetpack-developers for guidance!

---

Jetpack plugin:

The Jetpack plugin has different release cadences depending on the platform:

• WordPress.com Simple releases happen semi-continuously (PCYsg-Jjm-p2).
• WoA releases happen weekly.
• Releases to self-hosted sites happen monthly. The next release is scheduled for February 4, 2025 (scheduled code freeze on February 4, 2025).

If you have any questions about the release process, please ask in the #jetpack-releases channel on Slack.

[talldan]

This does fix the issue, but I'm unsure about it. The Jetpack button block seems to want to use the styles of the core button block, but this change takes it further away from that.

I noticed there's an unusual <div> wrapped around the button in the editor, which is the thing that makes it not full width there (it doesn't adopt the flex styling like the other form elements do). I feel like it's this markup disparity that's the core of the problem. Once that's gotten rid of, the frontend and the editor are working similarly, and then it's a question of how to constrain the width of the button to make it not full-width in the right way.

Probably the right thing would be wrapping it in a group or buttons block, but that's probably hard to achieve in a back compat way.

I'd be curious for your thoughts though, as you've probably looked at it and noticed similar things and maybe tried other fixes that didn't work, which is how you settled on this one. 😅

[aaronrobertshaw]

This does fix the issue

Works on the surface for me too.

I noticed there's an unusual <div> wrapped around the button in the editor

This does seem to be the root cause and is introduced by withFallbackStyles.

Once that's gotten rid of, the frontend and the editor are working similarly, and then it's a question of how to constrain the width of the button to make it not full-width in the right way.

Yep, fixing that wrapper would appear to then give us the reverse problem than we have now.

There seems to have been a trend of not passing a ref to the fallback styles and ThemeProvider that leads to excessive wrapping elements in the editor across the board. A concerted effort might be needed in that area to help smooth out a lot of Jetpack block kinks.

[tellthemachines]

So for context, I went for this patch because I realised the bug was caused by a recent code change in gutenberg and I wanted to minimise the impact of this fix by just counteracting that specific change.

The div wrapper is a nuisance because it introduces a difference between the editor and front end so yes, ideally we'd do away with it and have parity of styles between editor and front end.

If we did end up replacing this button with a core one, we'd then have a wrapper on both sides, because the core Button block only accepts a Buttons block as a parent. We could do a similar thing to what the experimental gutenberg forms do, which is lock the parent Buttons to prevent adding more children. Or not 🤷

[talldan]

I notice there's another PR that seems to be fixing this - #41139