Skip to content
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

Make job history sidebar be a dropdown #3299

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 31, 2017

Conversation

ibnc
Copy link
Contributor

@ibnc ibnc commented Mar 22, 2017

This PR changes the job history sidebar to be a dropdown instead. This frees up the space it is currently taking up for the console log (257px to be exact). I based the styling of this work off of mock ups provided by @naveenbhaskar. Bellow are screenshots

Console Tab:
console-tab

Console Tab with job history expanded:
console-tab-with-history-dropped

Note: The other tabs don't take up nearly as much vertical real estate as the console tab, and thus sometimes the the content of the job history dropdown will be too long. In this case, the dropdown's content will scroll. See bellow for an example.

Non Console Tab:
artifacts-tab

Non Console Tab with job history expanded (Note that in this case, the job history dropdown scrolls the overflow):
artifacts-tab-with-scrolling

* This will free up a fair amount of real estate for the console logs
@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 27, 2017

@naveenbhaskar thoughts?

@naveenbhaskar
Copy link
Contributor

yes.. dropdown doesn't have to be so long. it can scroll. we can make the min-height of the left tab and the job history bar the same, so that it will look the same height in most of the scenarios.

@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 28, 2017

@naveenbhaskar I believe that's what I've got in this PR. Unless I'm misunderstanding you.

If I'm not misunderstanding you, then I think this can be merged.

@arvindsv
Copy link
Member

I think he's saying that in the second image, the dropdown can be smaller. Not sure. Let's see what he says.

@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 28, 2017

I feel like what @naveenbhaskar is talking about is already in this PR. That said, I could just be confused. Regardless, I think the screenshot I uploaded is a little unclear. So, here's a better one:

screen shot 2017-03-28 at 1 38 42 pm

@naveenbhaskar
Copy link
Contributor

naveenbhaskar commented Mar 29, 2017 via email

@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 29, 2017

@naveenbhaskar Does the latest screenshot I posted match up with what you're saying? If so, then I think this can be merged.

@naveenbhaskar
Copy link
Contributor

naveenbhaskar commented Mar 30, 2017 via email

@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 31, 2017

@naveenbhaskar I sent them to you on gitter

@naveenbhaskar
Copy link
Contributor

naveenbhaskar commented Mar 31, 2017 via email

@ketan
Copy link
Member

ketan commented Mar 31, 2017

@ibnc — is this PR ready to merge? Is there anything pending on it?

@ibnc
Copy link
Contributor Author

ibnc commented Mar 31, 2017

@ketan Yep, it's ready to merge

@arvindsv arvindsv merged commit f362062 into gocd:master Mar 31, 2017
@ketan ketan modified the milestone: Release 17.4 Apr 3, 2017
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.

None yet

4 participants