[Popper] Move from mui-material to mui-core

[rebeccahongsf]

Moved the Popper component to the unstyled package and updated all references.

• Related to Issue Unstyled components progress base-ui#10 😃
• Doc Preview: https://deploy-preview-28923--material-ui.netlify.app/components/popper/#unstyled
• I have followed (at least) the PR section of the contributing guide.

[mui-pr-bot]

Details of bundle changes

@material-ui/unstyled: parsed: +43.84% , gzip: +43.47%

Generated by 🚫 dangerJS against 5278e11

[rebeccahongsf]

@michaldudak aside from the Azure Devops check that failed (I'm actively trying to figure out why), the PR is ready for first round of feedback/review. Thank you! 😄

[mnajdova]

I could notice few things still missing. Great first iteration 👍

[rebeccahongsf]

Huzzah! Thank you @mnajdova and @eps1lon! 🙌 I'll get those changes up in a jiffy.

[rebeccahongsf]

Ready for another round of feedback! 😃

Any suggestions on how I might go about troubleshooting the Azure bundle size error? I read within the contribution guidelines that its probably due to the packages or how the documentation was built. 🤔 Perhaps I'm missing a step on building a bundle?

[mnajdova]

Looks good to me. The Azure Pipelines are failing with JavaScript heap out of memory, I would ignore it for now.

[eps1lon]

Looks good to me. The Azure Pipelines are failing with JavaScript heap out of memory, I would ignore it for now.

Why? This job is an integral part of the CI pipeline. You can't just ignore parts because they fail. CI isn't just there to affirm you but also to signal mistakes you make. I've heard this a couple of times now from you and it's a concerning sentiment. I don't understand why you say this repeatedly. If you think there's a problem with CI in general, then let's discuss this separately. But constantly saying "ignore CI" in PRs is not a heatly sentiment.

There is definitely something off here that needs to be adressed.

[mnajdova]

Why? This job is an integral part of the CI pipeline. You can't just ignore parts because they fail. CI isn't just there to affirm you but also to signal mistakes you make. I've heard this a couple of times now from you and it's a concerning sentiment. I don't understand why you say this repeatedly. If you think there's a problem with CI in general, then let's discuss this separately. But constantly saying "ignore CI" in PRs is not a healthy sentiment.

I said, " I would ignore it for now". I meant for this iteration of the review, there are still things that need to be polished, we can focus on it in the end. I am not going to merge the PR if the CI is not green.

[mnajdova]

Talking about the Azure Pipelines, we should move the condition for the Popper component from: https://github.com/mui-org/material-ui/blob/master/scripts/sizeSnapshot/webpack.config.js#L20 to line 35 (inside the core package) otherwise the entry id would be overridden.

[rebeccahongsf]

Thank you @eps1lon and @mnajdova! PR #29005 resolved the bundling issue. I implemented the requested changes. Please do not hesitate to let me know if any other changes are needed. 😃

[eps1lon]

Looks good. Nice work 👍🏻

[michaldudak]

Congratulations @rebeccahongsf on being the first community contributor to create an unstyled component in @mui/core! 🎉