Separate modal overlay opening element option

[wbobeirne]

Closes #1836

• Adds modalOverlayOpeningElement option for specifying an HTMLElement or string selector for what the modal should target
  • Added documentation for this too
  • Added a cypress test for this new option, but in order to test this, I also added a getOpeningProperties method to modal so I could confirm the dimensions matched up with the desired element. Let me know if you'd rather this test be written in a different way that didn't require changing the API of modal.
• Refactored a little in general to reuse a parseElementOrSelector function for the new option and attachTo.element
  • Added a unit test for new parseElementOrSelector function

[wbobeirne]

Just tried the failing tests locally and they're passing for me. What's the best way to get more info out of CI? I couldn't find a way to get at any specific error logs or the screenshots.

[RobbieTheWagner]

@wbobeirne you can see the failing tests by clicking details next to them.

Seems like the test for undefined attachTo is broken https://github.com/shipshapecode/shepherd/runs/5489452652?check_suite_focus=true

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

[RobbieTheWagner]

@wbobeirne would you be able to rebase this with master? We've made some changes, so perhaps tests will work again.

[monshan]

@rwwagner90 I looked into this but @wbobeirne 's fork is password protected so I can't push my rebase to his branch, lmk your thoughts if its worth cloning and opening a new PR

[RobbieTheWagner]

@monshan if you use the GitHub desktop app, you can pull down this PR instead of a branch. That might be a good way to pull it down, rebase, and push it back up to this PR.

[RobbieTheWagner]

@monshan looks like we have some failing tests here still. How are things looking?

[monshan]

@rwwagner90 I thought the scope of this one would just be to rebase it which went through but still not passing. If I remember right its because this change conflicts with the Shepherd 10 upgrade because now the attachTo takes a function.

[RobbieTheWagner]

@rwwagner90 I thought the scope of this one would just be to rebase it which went through but still not passing. If I remember right its because this change conflicts with the Shepherd 10 upgrade because now the attachTo takes a function.

Ah yes, that sounds correct.

@wbobeirne could you please refactor this to be compliant with the new attachTo.element supporting functions?

[RobbieTheWagner]

@EmNicholson93 I think this needs some refactoring to be compliant with the new attachTo.element API. Can you please take a look?