New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove unintentional right-margin on last odd-item. #12199

Merged
merged 9 commits into from Feb 1, 2019

Conversation

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@m-e-h
Copy link
Contributor

m-e-h commented Nov 21, 2018

Description

Looks like it wasn't intended to for the last column to have a right-margin, but the :not(:last-child) used on the column would only "not add" the margin. It didn't remove it if the column was odd numbered.

This simplifies the logic and adds right and left margin to all columns but removes it from first-left and last-right.

I also replaced the flex: 1; property with flex-grow: 1;.
flex: 1 is = to flex-grow: 1; flex-shrink: 1; flex-basis: 0;
In this case flex-shrink keeps it's default value of 1 and flex-basis overwritten and is set to 100% a couple lines after. So flex-grow is all we need.

How has this been tested?

visually in chrome and firefox.

Screenshots

Before:
col-last-margin

After
after-col

Types of changes

Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

Checklist:

  • My code is tested.
  • My code follows the WordPress code style.
  • My code follows the accessibility standards.
  • My code has proper inline documentation.
Remove unintentional right-margin on last odd-item.
Looks like it wasn't intended to for the last column to have a `right-margin`, but the `:not(:last-child)` used here would only "not add" the margin. It didn't remove it if the column was odd numbered.

This simplifies the logic and adds right and left margin to all columns but removes it from first-left and last-right.

I also replaced the `flex: 1;` property with `flex-grow: 1;`. 
`flex: 1` is = to `flex-grow: 1; flex-shrink: 1; flex-basis: 0;`
In this case `flex-shrink` keeps it's default value of `1` and `flex-basis` overwritten and is set to `100%` a couple lines after. So `flex-grow` is all we need.
@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Nov 29, 2018

This is still broken b/w the 600px and 782px breakpoints.

@designsimply

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

designsimply commented Dec 9, 2018

Noting a related comment I found in a recent PR at #11904 (comment).

I'd rather Gutenberg added margins by default, and theme authors manually overrode that on the front end if for some reason they'd prefer to.

That would:

  • Ensure that by default, text-based columns have the margins they need.
  • Bring greater consistency between the front and back end.
@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Dec 11, 2018

@designsimply Thanks for linking that PR! I had previously tried to find discussion about how the columns were even supposed to look but hadn't seen that.

The best way to show what's going on with the margins is to use a CSS debugging utility like Pesticide. The screenshot below are three rows of column blocks. A 2 column, a 3 column, and a 4 column.

columns

As you can see, all rows have 0px margin on the left but the 3 column row is given a margin-right. This is because the row ends with an odd(:nth-child(odd)) numbered column(3).
5, 7, 9... columns would do the same thing.

The logic used here for the column margins doesn't add up.
As I mentioned above

the :not(:last-child) used on the column would only "not add" the margin. It didn't remove it if the column was odd numbered.

The method used for the text-column CSS works correctly:

	.wp-block-column {
		margin: 0 16px;
		padding: 0;

		&:first-child {
			margin-left: 0;
		}

		&:last-child {
			margin-right: 0;
		}
	}

Maybe we should go with something like that.
Or even better, only have one .wp-block-column style that covers both block types. SCSS folder structure be damned. 😀

The other separate problem noticed and mentioned by @drdogbot7 above, is that the design isn't fluid between breakpoints since our columns CSS is splitting one major layout change between two breakpoints, break-medium and break-small. The components rely on each other breaking at the same time. We need to decide on one, medium or small bp.

@jasmussen does this make sense?

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Dec 11, 2018

This solution works, but I think you're eliminating one of the original breakpoints.

Based on the comments, this is the original intent:

Mobile: less than 600px
all columns full width and stacked. No margins.

Small: 600px - 782px
columns wrap in rows of 2. Margins on the inside.

Medium: bigger than 782px
all columns fit in one row. Margins on the inside.

My solution #12408, attempts to keep the Small breakpoint and make it work.

Honestly… I'd be fine with simplifying things and losing the 2-column breakpoint. I just want it fixed!

@designsimply designsimply requested a review from jasmussen Dec 11, 2018

@jasmussen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jasmussen commented Dec 12, 2018

Thanks, all, for the work here. This needs a thorough testing and I will test as soon as I can. In the mean time, this just a 👍 👍 for helping uncover and fix these issues.

Honestly… I'd be fine with simplifying things and losing the 2-column breakpoint.

I think that's fine too if it solves a problem or simplifies things.

@jasmussen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jasmussen commented Dec 12, 2018

Thanks again for working on this. Took it for a good spin, and it seems to be working as intended. Nice work. It also doesn't seem to break a few of the flex things that were difficult to get working, notably around making sure content doesn't grow larger than its parent contents:

screenshot 2018-12-12 at 12 32 25

As I look at this on admittedly extreme 8-column setups, I'm finding myself missing the 2-column midway breakpoint as noted in #12199 (comment). But if there's a good reason for why we can't restore that, that's okay too, just want to make sure we do this with a will.

Expanding the testing range to Kjell who was instrumental in helping to ship this.

@jasmussen jasmussen requested review from kjellr and WordPress/gutenberg-core Dec 12, 2018

@aduth

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

aduth commented Dec 12, 2018

Some more testing, on twentyeleven and twentynineteen, with forced backgrounds to clearly verify. Interestingly, the twentynineteen theme "cheated" by bundling their own fix.

twentyeleven

Before After
2011 before 2011 after

twentynineteen

Before After
2019 before 2019 after

(The extended height of the last column in twentynineteen may be an unintended consequence of this style rule?)

@kjellr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

kjellr commented Dec 12, 2018

This seems to fix things on the front end:

localhost_8888__p 21

... but I'm still seeing additional margins applied on the back end:

localhost_8888_wp-admin_post php_post 21 action edit 1

Can anyone else confirm that?

Like @jasmussen, I do miss the 2-columns at middle-breakpoints a bit. It'd be cool to include that if possible.

(The extended height of the last column in twentynineteen may be an unintended consequence of this style rule?)

I think you're right. I can get that fixed in the theme. 👍 On second thought... I can't find any instances where this actually causes any problems, and visually these end up being the same height. So I'll let it be for now.

@aduth

aduth approved these changes Dec 12, 2018

Copy link
Member

aduth left a comment

As mentioned by @drdogbot7 at #12199 (comment), this is still broken at some viewport ranges:

image

(650px width in this screenshot)

However, it's no more or less broken than the current state of master, so I'd still consider this to be an improvement. Or would you want to take a stab at fixing that here?


// Add space between columns. Themes can customize this if they wish to work differently.
// Only apply this beyond the mobile breakpoint, as there's only a single column on mobile.
margin-right: $grid-size-large * 2;

This comment has been minimized.

@aduth

aduth Dec 12, 2018

Member

These seem like a generally much easier set of rules to follow. I kept thinking I'd have thought this would have the effect of doubling up the margin from what had existed previously since only one or the other horizontal margin was applied, but I realized after some time I'd totally missed the previous &:not(:last-child) { rule.

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Dec 12, 2018

Using &:not(:last-child) and &:not(:first-child) requires fewer lines of code, but it's admittedly a little confusing. I think it just depends on what your priorities are. Both do the same thing.

&:not(:first-child) {
margin-left: $grid-size-large * 2;
// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
flex-basis: 50%;

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Dec 12, 2018

If we're getting rid of the 2-column breakpoint, then flex-basis:auto; would make more sense here wouldn't it?

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Dec 12, 2018

As I look at this on admittedly extreme 8-column setups, I'm finding myself missing the 2-column midway breakpoint as noted in #12199 (comment). But if there's a good reason for why we can't restore that, that's okay too, just want to make sure we do this with a will.

At 600px, a most 3+ column layouts are gonna look squished. If we're going to lose the 2-column breakpoint, then I think I'd prefer to keep the columns stacked until 782px.

That would also make it easier for theme developers to add a 600px-782px breakpoint if they want to, because they wouldn't have to override as many styles.

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Dec 12, 2018

Submitted a new pull request (#12816) that fixes the margins and keeps the 2-column breakpoint. Added fixes to the editor stylesheet as well.

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Dec 12, 2018

I can't remember if I noticed the extra margin in the editor or not. I don't see where this style was duplicated or any styles at all for .wp-block-column in editor.css so I would think the change in style.css would take affect in the editor. I'll test it out in a few.

I think a breakpoint at 2 columns would be nice too. Does it currently have one. If I removed it, I didn't intend to.
I consolidated a couple redundant @include break-small() for simplicity sake. Would this have removed it?

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Dec 12, 2018

I can't remember if I noticed the extra margin in the editor or not. I don't see where this style was duplicated or any styles at all for .wp-block-column in editor.css so I would think the change in style.css would take affect in the editor. I'll test it out in a few.

The issue is that there's a lot of extra markup in the editor view, so the editor.scss needs to be adjusted to account for that. In the editor the .wp-block-column styles are applied to:

.wp-block-columns > .editor-inner-blocks > .editor-block-list__layout > [data-type="core/column"]

I think a breakpoint at 2 columns would be nice too. Does it currently have one. If I removed it, I didn't intend to.
I consolidated a couple redundant @include break-small() for simplicity sake. Would this have removed it?

I think it was supposed to have a 2-column breakpoint, but it didn't really work. Styles were added at the 'small' breakpoint that should have been split between 'small' and 'medium'.

From what I can tell, the margins that were added with ODD and EVEN rules were supposed to be for the 'small' (2-column) breakpoint where the columns wrap, and the not:(:first/last-child) rules were intended to apply at the 'medium' breakpoint where the columns all fit in one row.

At the 'medium' breakpoint, the ODD/EVEN rules also need to be reset or you end up with that "unintentional right margin".

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Dec 12, 2018

I just updated the editor.css to match style.css for the margins if @kjellr or anyone wants to test. Seems to have done the trick for me in the editor.

One other thing I wanted to clarify about intended design for "columns".

The styles in this PR more or less duplicate the styles for Text Column block except that the text column has a 16px right/left margin while this column has 32px right/left margin.
Text column:

.wp-block-text-columns .wp-block-column {
	margin: 0 16px;
}

vs the general column block:

.wp-block-column {
	margin-left: 32px;
	margin-right: 32px;
}

Realize with the columns sitting side by side, our column block here actually has 64px of separation between columns while the text-column has 32px between. Is this the original intent?

I'm wondering if like @aduth was thinking here #12199 (comment) the intent of the even/odd was to not double up margins in between. And 32px is actually the desired space between columns?

@kjellr

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

kjellr commented Dec 12, 2018

I just updated the editor.css to match style.css for the margins if @kjellr or anyone wants to test. Seems to have done the trick for me in the editor.

Yes, that latest update works on my end. 👍

m-e-h added some commits Dec 13, 2018

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Dec 13, 2018

Thanks to @drdogbot7 I finally think I understand the overall design intent of the current CSS.
I opened this PR only thinking in terms of the extra right margin on desktop.

I'll break down my understanding and the code to accomplish it.

  • Each row of columns should be flush with the container, as are other blocks.

  • On mobile, a single column should take up the full width of the screen.

  • A little larger, @include break-small. Two columns, separated by a space, should take up the full width.

The column width should be half the screen(50%) - half our margin since we have 2 cols but only one margin

flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large});

We only need the margin before the second column in the row (even)

:nth-child(even) {
	margin-left: $grid-size-large * 2;
}
  • On medium sized screens and up, @include break-medium. All columns are in a single row, separated by a space but still flush with the container at the beginning and the end of the row.

We add the margin before all columns except for the first in the row. Right margins are never add so we don't worry about the last column

:not(:first-child) {
	margin-left: $grid-size-large * 2;
}

I'm not crazy about the specificity added by pseudo-classes but I don't think it's avoidable and it's not too bad here.

I've updated this PR and tested.

@@ -89,30 +89,24 @@

// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
@include break-small() {
flex-basis: 50%;
flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large});

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Dec 13, 2018

Need to account for the additional padding added in the editor.

flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2});

This comment has been minimized.

@jasmussen

jasmussen Dec 17, 2018

Contributor

As noted in feedback here, https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/pull/12816/files#r242051845, this has an unintentional side-effect. Are you sure it needs this additional padding into consideration? I believe it does not, because of the negative margins present in the editor. Yeah this is a bit of a headache, I'd love refactoring this in the future to simplify things, but for now I think we might need separate rules for the editor and the front-end.

@drdogbot7
Copy link

drdogbot7 left a comment

Is it ok that we're reducing the overall spacing b/w columns from 64px to 32px? I agree that there was too much originally, but are we fixing a mistake or just making an opinionated change?

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Dec 13, 2018

fixing a mistake or just making an opinionated change?

Both kinda. I'm guessing that's how it was intended to look before all the iterations took it elsewhere.
Just a guess though. I could be wrong

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Jan 29, 2019

Just removed a rogue whitespace in the scss file. It should pass the tests now.

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Jan 29, 2019

2 column breakpoint isn't working in twenty-nineteen… though that may have more to do with the quirks of that theme than it does this PR.

image

EDIT: It looks like that theme sets "flex-wrap: nowrap" at 600px, which overrides our 2 column BP. More and more I think we should ditch the 2 column BP entirely.

flex-grow: 0;
}

// Add space between columns. Themes can customize this if they wish to work differently.
// This has to match the same padding applied in style.scss.
// Only apply this beyond the mobile breakpoint, as there's only a single column on mobile.
@include break-small() {
&:nth-child(odd) {
margin-right: $grid-size-large * 2;
}
&:nth-child(even) {
margin-left: $grid-size-large * 2;

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Jan 29, 2019

EDITED b/c my initial fix was wrong.
Column gutters are too narrow in editor view compared to frontend. I think you need to do (2 * $grid-size-large) + $block-padding here to account for the negative margins added by the editor. See #12816.

image

@@ -10,41 +10,37 @@
}

.wp-block-column {
flex: 1;
flex-grow: 1;

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Jan 29, 2019

I don't think this property is necessary since we are setting the width to 100% below.

@@ -10,41 +10,37 @@
}

.wp-block-column {
flex: 1;
flex-grow: 1;
margin-bottom: 1em;

// Responsiveness: Show at most one columns on mobile.
flex-basis: 100%;

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Jan 29, 2019

If we change this to width:100%; we accomplish the same thing and make it easier to override.

(content < width < flex-basis)


// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large});
flex-grow: 0;

This comment has been minimized.

@drdogbot7

drdogbot7 Jan 29, 2019

flex-grow:0; isn't necessary here, if we remove flex-grow:1; above.

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Jan 29, 2019

Exactly right @drdogbot7! I just updated to account for the negative margins added by the editor.
I think you're correct on the flex stuff too but I'm not gonna mess with style.scss anymore. As long as it works we can optimise the CSS choices on down the road.
We need to get this thing merged 😃

@gziolo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Jan 30, 2019

Exactly right @drdogbot7! I just updated to account for the negative margins added by the editor.
I think you're correct on the flex stuff too but I'm not gonna mess with style.scss anymore. As long as it works we can optimise the CSS choices on down the road.
We need to get this thing merged 😃

Does it mean it's ready to merge? Can someone give it after the recent changes applied?

@jasmussen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jasmussen commented Jan 30, 2019

This is a MASSIVE improvement. Thank you so much @m-e-h and @drdogbot7 for your valiant work.

I agree let's get this in ASAP and then push additional fixes separately.

However I'm seeing a small regression in Chrome, and it's directly related to this conversation here #12199 (comment) — GIFs:

This is master, this shows the bug that this PR tries to fix:

master

Note the additional margin on odd numberd (3, 5) columns.

The following is this branch as it is right now:

this branch

A vast improvement, but notice how on EVEN numbered columns (2, 4, 6) the last child has an additional tiny padding.

What's up?

When the code looks like this, the column width is accurate ONLY for odd numbers of columns:

			// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
			@include break-small() {
				flex-basis: calc(50% - (#{$grid-size-large * 2} + #{$block-padding}));
				flex-grow: 0;
			}

When the code looks like this, everything appears to work for me, AND the initial issue appears fixed:

			// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
			@include break-small() {
				flex-basis: 50%;
				flex-grow: 0;
			}

Here's how that looks:

suggested change

The issue ALSO appears to be fixed if we add the suggested change by @drdogbot7:

			// Beyond mobile, allow 2 columns.
			@include break-small() {
				flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2});
				flex-grow: 0;
			}

Here's how that looks:

drogbot suggested change

I just tested and both flex-basis: 50%; and flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2}); both fix the issue in IE11 and Edge, same as the other browsers. Here's Edge:

edge

Final step:

We need figure out why both flex-basis: 50%; and flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2}); fix the issue, and then we need to pick which one to ship. And THEN we should merge. And THEN we should party.

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Jan 30, 2019

flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2}); is correct. This resolves to 50% - 44px.

calc(50% - (#{$grid-size-large * 2} + #{$block-padding})); resolves to 50% - 46px, which is close but not quite right. Pretty sure I came up with this so… oops!

flex-basis:50%; blows up the small, 2-column breakpoint, and we're back to where we started. This makes no sense.

image

flex-basis: calc(50% - #{$grid-size-large} - #{$block-padding * 2}); works for me at both breakpoints. THOUGH we do still have a vertical spacing issue when the columns wrap.

image

image

Remember, at the medium breakpoint the columns will shrink to fit the row, but they won't grow any wider than their initial size. When we set flex-basis, we're essentially setting the maximum width of a column.

One unintended consequence of this is that if you have a single column, it won't use all the available space:

image

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Jan 30, 2019

I've spent the last few hours fussing with this, and I really think that the only reasonable thing for us to do is to remove the small (2-column) breakpoint entirely from the columns block.

  • It is broken in the currently released version, so we're not removing anything that users are relying on.
  • It is an opinionated addition that would be better left to themers
  • Even with this fix, it is broken Twenty-Nineteen, which will be many users first (possibly last?) experience with this block.

Let's remove it now when it will be least disruptive. This will save us and users a lot of headache moving forward. I think this would be the right course of action even if it means delaying the fix.

EDIT: I created a PR #13605, that does this… just as an example.

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Jan 30, 2019

I updated the flex-basis calculation. The math is lost on me but it appears to be the values we need. 🤔

I do see the issue with twentynineteen. It's setting the flex-wrap: nowrap; to start at >600px. Looks like they just went with what they were given to work with and the editor columns don't currently have a working medium breakpoint.

As much as I prefer having the two column bp, perhaps @drdogbot7 is correct. While it seems we're fixing a broken implementation of the medium breakpoint, we're actually introducing a new medium breakpoint since there never actually was one. A breaking change? Maybe.

@drdogbot7

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

drdogbot7 commented Jan 30, 2019

While it seems we're fixing a broken implementation of the medium breakpoint, we're actually introducing a new medium breakpoint since there never actually was one.

To be fair, there were distinct small and medium breakpoints, but the small breakpoint was totally broken, and the medium breakpoint was buggy. In the code, the breakpoints got a bit muddled together which added to the confusion.

At this point some important actively developed themes twenty-nineteen, atomic-theme have implemented their own fixes (as I did for a site I built last month). Even if we restrict ourselves to doing the bare minimum to just squash the bugs (see #12816), we'll probably inadvertently break certain themes… but what's the alternative?

@jasmussen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jasmussen commented Jan 31, 2019

One unintended consequence of this is that if you have a single column, it won't use all the available space:

I would almost suggest an argument can be made this is intentional. In any case it can be fixed separately and shouldn't block this.

Even with this fix, it is broken Twenty-Nineteen, which will be many users first (possibly last?) experience with this block.

I do see the issue with twentynineteen. It's setting the flex-wrap: nowrap; to start at >600px. Looks like they just went with what they were given to work with and the editor columns don't currently have a working medium breakpoint.

Yep. My bad. But we can trivially fix TwentyNineteen with an update, so that's not a problem.

However if you both agree that the medium breakpoint is not productive for this block, I strongly agree it's a good time to remove it. In light of new responsive controls being worked on, perhaps it's even moreso the time.

@m-e-h can you make this final change, and then let's ship this thing?

@gziolo

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

gziolo commented Jan 31, 2019

@m-e-h can you make this final change, and then let's ship this thing?

If we want to ship it in Gutenberg 5.0 it needs to be in the shippable state by tomorrow.

@m-e-h

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor Author

m-e-h commented Feb 1, 2019

I've been playing with different variations WAY too much tonight. I say ship it like this, with the two column breakpoint.
Removing the two column bp leaves us 1 column still on an 800px screen width. Something just doesn't seem right about that, being that this is a "column" block.

Twentyninetine will need some tweaks but I think that'll be the case even without the 2 column bp.

When testing an unstyled Underscores theme, the 2 column breakpoint version is the only thing that looks great without a total re-write of this CSS.

A complete rewrite will come but I'm thinking the best thing to do now is to fix what's "broken", which is the right margin on medium+ screens and the jagged layout small+ screens.

#13363 is looking like the proper way to handle column styles. Not that it matters too much but I also think having the "mobile","tablet","desktop" breakpoints in place already seems to be in line with the direction of that discussion so far.

@jasmussen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

jasmussen commented Feb 1, 2019

Thank you all for the thoughtful feedback,

I'm for merging this now as a vast improvement over what's in master today. You all have good points, and let's continue to explore enhancements in #13363 and even through methods such as #13605. Inaction is only going to make matters worse, and this PR fixes problems.

Here are some GIFs:

6 cols

5 cols

It is unfortunate that themes have had to fix issues present, and it will be unfortunate if this bugfix causes further issues. However:

a) this will be not make it to WordPress 5.1 and will likely land in 5.2, so there will be some runway both to become aware of any breakage, and perhaps to even land further improvements

b) themes thankfully have a relatively seamless method of providing updates

I would recommend we merge this in the current state, for all of the discussion provided above.

@jasmussen jasmussen merged commit 9fbab73 into WordPress:master Feb 1, 2019

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

daniloercoli added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 1, 2019

Merge branch 'master' of https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg into …
…rnmobile/372-use-RichText-on-Title-block

* 'master' of https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg:
  Try alternate list item jump fix. (#12941)
  Mobile bottom sheet component (#13612)
  Remove unintentional right-margin on last odd-item. (#12199)
  Introduce left and right float alignment options to latest posts block (#8814)
  Fix Google Docs table paste (#13543)
  Increase bottom padding on gallery image caption (#13623)
  Fix the editor save keyboard shortcut not working in code editor view (#13159)
  Plugin: Deprecate gutenberg_add_admin_body_class (#13572)
  Rnmobile/upload media failed state (#13615)
  Make clickOnMoreMenuItem not dependent on aria labels (#13166)
  Add: className prop support to server side render. (#13568)
  Fix: Categories Block: hierarchical Dropdown (#13567)
  Docs: Add clarification about git workflow (#13534)
  Plugin: Remove `user_can_richedit` filtering (#13608)
  eslint-plugin: Add rule `no-unused-vars-before-return` (#12828)
  Image settings button (#13597)
  Fixed wording for the color picker saturation (#13479)

# Conflicts:
#	packages/block-library/src/image/edit.native.js
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment