Don't cache not valid taxonomy frontend pages and stop applying optimizations

[wordpressfan]

Description

Fixes https://github.com/wp-media/wp-rocket.me/issues/4164

In this pull request, we are checking if the current frontend page is a taxonomy page and it has a not valid url schema, then we disable this page's caching, also stop applying all optimizations there.

Type of change

• [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue).
• [x] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as before).

Detailed scenario

As mentioned in the issue itself:

if i visit wordpress.org at: https://wordpress.org/news/category/releases/ i get a response 200 and see the content.

Then again if i change the url so the last part still exists, something like: https://wordpress.org/news/category/i_just_added_something_here/releases/

Technical description

Documentation

Here we get all public taxonomies that have UI pages and compare the current page's query var with the taxonomies query vars. We provided also a filter rocket_cache_taxonomy_query_vars so we can include or exclude taxonomy query vars from that functionality.

New dependencies

No

Risks

The only thing that I can think of, is that we will prevent those pages from being cached as they were already cached but that's to fix the mentioned issue.

Also for @wp-media/qa-team, In this PR, we also added a change to check if the rocket_buffer filter returns empty HTML, then we will revert back to the main page's HTML, so if you used the following snippet as an example:

add_filter( 'rocket_buffer', function ( $html ) {
    return '';
} );

Before this PR, the page will be blank, but with this PR, we will show the not optimized page.

Mandatory Checklist

Code validation

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

Code style

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

Additional Checks

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

[codacy-production[bot]]

Coverage summary from Codacy

See diff coverage on Codacy

Coverage variation	Diff coverage
Report missing for 8b46e6b8692f3b80931d352eaee78481fa5467e6[^1]	:white_check_mark: 51.85% (target: 50.00%)

Coverage variation details

	Coverable lines	Covered lines	Coverage
Common ancestor commit (8b46e6b8692f3b80931d352eaee78481fa5467e6)	Report Missing	Report Missing	Report Missing
Head commit (d01ebd7d48e1fd2b64a001c4e8dfa5ab6d1757dc)	37781	16617	43.98%

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 (#6984)	27	14	51.85%

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} [^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.

[remyperona]

@wordpressfan I think the changes look good to fix the issue at hand, are you waiting for something before moving it forward to review?

[wordpressfan]

This PR was a POC to validate the idea, so it needs to be adapted to be a real PR, like fixing phpcs and tests.

[wordpressfan]

I'm working on tests now