Move additional dependencies from private getters to constructor - Magento_PageCache

[Bartlomiejsz]

Description (*)

This PR moves additionally introduced dependencies from private getter methods into constructor in Magento_PageCache module.

Related Pull Requests

Manual testing scenarios (*)

Questions or comments

Contribution checklist (*)

• Pull request has a meaningful description of its purpose
• All commits are accompanied by meaningful commit messages
• All new or changed code is covered with unit/integration tests (if applicable)
• All automated tests passed successfully (all builds are green)

[m2-assistant]

Hi @Bartlomiejsz. Thank you for your contribution
Here is some useful tips how you can test your changes using Magento test environment.
Add the comment under your pull request to deploy test or vanilla Magento instance:

• @magento give me test instance - deploy test instance based on PR changes
• @magento give me 2.4-develop instance - deploy vanilla Magento instance

For more details, please, review the Magento Contributor Guide documentation.

[rogyar]

Hi @Bartlomiejsz. We can consider this change as backward incompatible. If some other class inherits the current class in some Magento based project, we will have an error upon calling parent::construct(..) in a child class because the child class is not supposed to pass $fullPageCache and $tagResolver arguments.

What I suggest here is to instantiate the corresponding object if it's not being passed as an argument. See the following instantiation as an example.

[Bartlomiejsz]

Hi @rogyar, I asked similar question in one of my previous PRs, such non-backward compatible changes I'm doing in those PRs are based on info I received in #26269, where I was asked to replace backward-compatible change with one that doesn't use ObjectManager, since we're developing for 2.4 now.
Also such changes are being directly merged to core by Magento core team 4e6f6ae

[rogyar]

Hi @Bartlomiejsz. You are right, that's fair since we are editing a non-API class. That's rather a professional habit avoid bringing backward-incompatible changes :)

[rogyar]

Please, check my previous comment regarding the backward compatibility

[rogyar]

For QA. Looks like we have a couple of fluky functional tests since changes in the current PR are not related to order creation process somehow.

[magento-engcom-team]

Hi @rogyar, thank you for the review.
ENGCOM-6828 has been created to process this Pull Request

[engcom-Delta]

✔️ QA passed

[engcom-Charlie]

Failed functional test not related to the changes in this PR test fails in 2.4-develop with MSI modules.

[m2-assistant]

Hi @Bartlomiejsz, thank you for your contribution!
Please, complete Contribution Survey, it will take less than a minute.
Your feedback will help us to improve contribution process.