Fix site specific features passed to front-end for simple sites

[manzoorwanijk]

Prepares the ground for https://github.com/Automattic/jetpack-reach/issues/511

Now that we have started consolidating our initial state via our script-data package, there is something we still need to fix. We want to be able to check for specific features in our front-end code. Right now, that logic is used in a weird way - sometimes via getJetpackExtensionAvailability and sometimes the feature checks are passed from the backend as boolean flags and there are too many of them and often repeated at multiple places. On the backend, Current_Plan:supports() works fine for both Jetpack and Simple sites to check if a feature is available for a site or not but Current_Plan::get() doesn't work as expected. It returns an empty set of features for Simple sites.

So, in order to have a single source of truth to check features on client-side, we need to pass all the available features down to the client-side code via script-data package.

This PR extracts the logic used here to Current_Plan::get_simple_site_specific_features() and updates the script data to override features for simple sites using that function.

This allows us to have a utility function like siteHasFeature on client-side work reliably, both for Jetpack and Simple sites.

Why do we need this?

We at Jetpack Reach are migrating all of our scattered initial to the consolidated initial state (script data) and thus we also want to move away from passing the boolean flags for features and the flags like hasPaidPlan, hasPaidFeatures etc. to avoid unintentional bugs when features are moved between plans (free/paid) and thus we want to explicitly check for exact feature availability, which is the recommended way. So, we need siteHasFeature utility.

Proposed changes:

• Add get_simple_site_specific_features method to Current_Plan
• Update script-data to add siteHasFeature function
• Add features for simple sites to the script data

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 editor on Jetpack and Simple sites
• Open browser console
• Enter JetpackScriptData.site.plan.features
• Confirm that you see the active and available features

[manzoorwanijk]

This method is copied here, with an added simple site check

jetpack/projects/plugins/jetpack/class.jetpack-gutenberg.php

Lines 1159 to 1174 in 347b86a

	private static function get_site_specific_features() {
	$current_blog_id = get_current_blog_id();
	if ( isset( self::$site_specific_features[ $current_blog_id ] ) ) {
	return self::$site_specific_features[ $current_blog_id ];
	}
	if ( ! class_exists( 'Store_Product_List' ) ) {
	require WP_CONTENT_DIR . '/admin-plugins/wpcom-billing/store-product-list.php';
	}
	$site_specific_features = Store_Product_List::get_site_specific_features_data( $current_blog_id );
	self::$site_specific_features[ $current_blog_id ] = $site_specific_features;
	return $site_specific_features;
	}

[manzoorwanijk]

@Automattic/jetpack-crew @Automattic/jetpack-garage this is where I need your feedback. I want to know whether this is OK to do here.

Plans::get_plans() already does something similar.

[zinigor]

It looks OK to me, since we're making sure first that this is a Simple site environment. And I think copying the method is a valid approach to make sure we're leaving old methods in place.

[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/site-specific-features-for-simple-sites branch.

  • For jetpack-mu-wpcom changes, also add define( 'JETPACK_MU_WPCOM_LOAD_VIA_BETA_PLUGIN', true ); to your wp-config.php file.

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

  bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack fix/site-specific-features-for-simple-sites
  

  bin/jetpack-downloader test jetpack-mu-wpcom-plugin fix/site-specific-features-for-simple-sites
  

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 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!