Skip to content

NIFI-11874: apply new layout of Process Group configuration into two columns#7538

Closed
markobean wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
markobean:NIFI-11874
Closed

NIFI-11874: apply new layout of Process Group configuration into two columns#7538
markobean wants to merge 1 commit intoapache:mainfrom
markobean:NIFI-11874

Conversation

@markobean
Copy link
Contributor

@markobean markobean commented Jul 29, 2023

Summary

NIFI-11874
UI modification for the layout of Process Group configuration. It separates the increasing number of configuration options into two columns. This presents better in the UI and keeps the Apply button easily accessible without the need to scroll (for most display resolutions.)

Includes additional details for several of the Process Group properties to explicitly clarify that the default connections settings apply only to new connections - not existing connections.

Tracking

Please complete the following tracking steps prior to pull request creation.

Issue Tracking

Pull Request Tracking

  • Pull Request title starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, such as NIFI-00000
  • Pull Request commit message starts with Apache NiFi Jira issue number, as such NIFI-00000

Pull Request Formatting

  • Pull Request based on current revision of the main branch
  • Pull Request refers to a feature branch with one commit containing changes

Verification

Please indicate the verification steps performed prior to pull request creation.

Build

  • Build completed using mvn clean install -P contrib-check
    • JDK 17

Licensing

  • New dependencies are compatible with the Apache License 2.0 according to the License Policy
  • New dependencies are documented in applicable LICENSE and NOTICE files

Documentation

  • Documentation formatting appears as expected in rendered files

Copy link
Contributor

@exceptionfactory exceptionfactory left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the contribution @markobean.

The initial pull request has some merge conflicts, most likely due to a recent change on the main branch.

It is important to note that the pull request introducing Stateless Execution mode for Process Groups will also introduce some changes to this screen.

@mcgilman and @mtien-apache have evaluated some of these changes, and after the Stateless Execution pull request is merged, that would be a better time to consider the overall layout of the Process Group dialog. Some of the changes will be specific to the main branch, so we may also need to consider the version 1 branch separately.

@mcgilman
Copy link
Contributor

mcgilman commented Aug 1, 2023

Thanks for the PR @markobean! As @exceptionfactory mentioned there are some further additions to this page currently under development. There is absolutely a need to update the layout here to avoid the concerns around scrolling as you've mentioned. It may even make sense to introduce a third column and ensure that appropriate fields are co-located.

@markobean
Copy link
Contributor Author

markobean commented Aug 1, 2023

@mcgilman Do you know when the additions to this dialog are expected to be added? Is there a Pull Request yet?

@exceptionfactory
Copy link
Contributor

PR #7253 includes changes to the Process Group dialog supporting additional fields for Stateless execution. That should be close to completion. After that is merged, it will be a good opportunity to revisit the layout of the Process Group dialog.

@exceptionfactory
Copy link
Contributor

@markobean With the changes merged for the Stateless execution pull request, this pull request could be rebased and re-evaluated. However, given the number of changes, it is probably better to consider the overall approach.

@markobean
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this PR. I will refactor given the changes in NIFI-11556 and resubmit a new PR.

@markobean markobean closed this Aug 9, 2023
@markobean markobean deleted the NIFI-11874 branch August 10, 2023 02:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants