Prepare for rocket head ordering

[wordpressfan]

Description

Fixes #7272

Every thing is mentioned in the issue itself.

Type of change

• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality).
• Enhancement (non-breaking change which improves an existing functionality).

Detailed scenario

Here we refactor how our features add items into the head directly after title closing tag </title>.

Technical description

Documentation

We introduced here a filter to print anything needed in the head part and its usage is as follows:

add_filter( 'rocket_head_items', function( $items ) {
    return $items;
} );

and this $items is an array of array variable with the following structure:

$items = [
    'open_tag' => '<style',
    'close_tag' => '</style>',
    'inner_content' => 'h1{color: red;}',
    'id' => 'any_id',
..... any html attribute as key => value
];

and if u need to add HTML attribute without value, something like crossorigin, you can add its key as a numeric, something like:

1 => 'crosorigin',

Also we introduced a helper trait called ElementTrait to help in inserting the common head elements like preload, preconnect, style, noscript, ...etc.

Also as a standard, we will use the following filter priorities:

Priority 10: preconnect
Priority 30: preload
Priority 50: styles, noscripts, scripts, ...etc.

New dependencies

No

Risks

We validated the e2e and it works, also most of tests passed, just had an issue with one test that it fails for the first time, that we need to revisit later on.

Mandatory Checklist

Code validation

• I validated all the Acceptance Criteria. If possible, provide screenshots or videos.
• I triggered all changed lines of code at least once without new errors/warnings/notices.
• I implemented built-in tests to cover the new/changed code.

Code style

• I wrote a self-explanatory code about what it does.
• I protected entry points against unexpected inputs.
• I did not introduce unnecessary complexity.
• Output messages (errors, notices, logs) are explicit enough for users to understand the issue and are actionnable.

Unticked items justification

If some mandatory items are not relevant, explain why in this section.

Additional Checks

• In the case of complex code, I wrote comments to explain it.
• When possible, I prepared ways to observe the implemented system (logs, data, etc.).
• I added error handling logic when using functions that could throw errors (HTTP/API request, filesystem, etc.)

[codacy-production]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
Report missing for d4ad5341	❌ 39.00% (target: 50.00%)

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (d4ad534)	Report Missing	Report Missing	Report Missing
Head commit (11d44ef)	39247	17108	43.59%

Coverage variation is the difference between the coverage for the head and common ancestor commits of the pull request branch: <coverage of head commit> - <coverage of common ancestor commit>

Diff coverage details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Diff coverage
Pull request (#7304)	241	94	39.00%

Diff coverage is the percentage of lines that are covered by tests out of the coverable lines that the pull request added or modified: <covered lines added or modified>/<coverable lines added or modified> * 100%

See your quality gate settings    Change summary preferences

_{Codacy stopped sending the deprecated coverage status on June 5th, 2024. Learn more}

Footnotes

1. Codacy didn't receive coverage data for the commit, or there was an error processing the received data. Check your integration for errors and validate that your coverage setup is correct. ↩

[wordpressfan]

created a followup issue here:
#7315
not to forget to fix the skipped tests.