-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
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
Split state and record for a list item, fixed #129 #130
Conversation
I think it's a major since I change a few interface for the components. Let me know if you are not agreeing. Also feel free to propose different names for the interface attributes. |
Changes Unknown when pulling 9462e67 on dafortin:master into ** on ciena-frost:master**. |
We need to do everything possible avoid #major# releases - can you summarize the breaking changes? |
I think we can probably do a #patch# since the interfaces changes are for components that I'm not expecting people to use on their own. |
Changes Unknown when pulling 9e6e12b on dafortin:master into ** on ciena-frost:master**. |
Changes Unknown when pulling 37c3b45 on dafortin:master into ** on ciena-frost:master**. |
addon/components/frost-list.js
Outdated
@@ -129,17 +129,6 @@ export default Component.extend({ | |||
|
|||
// == Lifecycle Hooks ======================================================= | |||
|
|||
didUpdateAttrs ({newAttrs}) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sorry - can you put a quick explanation on the removal of this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We don't need the frost scroll with the vertical-collection
. The vertical collection has the scrolling capability.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I reverted this 👍
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Did you push the changeset? It still appears as removed in the PR
|
||
{{#if pagination}} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it necessary to remove the "basic" {{#each}} loop in the pagination case? I'd prefer to not introduce {{#vertical-collection}} for those people using the pagination scenario in a minor release
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can remove it. I thought you asked me to replace the each
by a vertical-collection.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I'd like to keep the existing pagination so that we don't risk breaking
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ping me when that's done and I'll merge
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Sure I reverted this :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same here, still appears as removed in the PR
containerSelector=null | ||
containerHeight=null | ||
key='@identity' | ||
resizeDebounce=64 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
64?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure what this is. I simply used the same vertical collection as below... I feel like we have a lot of properties that might not be necessary in the vertical collection.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ok, that's fine - it's like 15 FPSish - just an odd default, but no problem
Looks good overall, just a few comments |
Changes Unknown when pulling e008455 on dafortin:master into ** on ciena-frost:master**. |
@sglanzer pushed the changes |
Changes Unknown when pulling f403e20 on dafortin:master into ** on ciena-frost:master**. |
This project uses semver, please check the scope of this pr:
CHANGELOG
smoke-and-mirrors