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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[3.x] Add highlight to the relationship lines of selected Tree items #50622

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 3.x
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[3.x] Add highlight to the relationship lines of selected Tree items #50622

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+159 −37

Conversation

AaronRecord
Copy link
Contributor

@AaronRecord AaronRecord commented Jul 19, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Backport of #48546 and #49085

2021-07-19_15-50-42_Trim.mp4

@AaronRecord AaronRecord requested review from a team as code owners July 19, 2021 21:46
@AaronRecord
Copy link
Contributor Author

AaronRecord commented Jul 19, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Not sure if #49085 needs to be backported as well... I couldn't reproduce #49080.
cc @pycbouh

@YuriSizov
Copy link
Contributor

I didn't backport it because this PR introduces breaking changes to the theme of the Tree node. I'm not sure if we would allow it for 3.4 or not.

As for the other issue, it depends on how close you've copied the implementation. And if you've ported the code from the current master, then it already includes all the fixes 🙃

@YuriSizov YuriSizov added this to the 3.4 milestone Jul 19, 2021
@AaronRecord
Copy link
Contributor Author

AaronRecord commented Jul 19, 2021 •
edited
Loading

I didn't backport it because this PR introduces breaking changes to the theme of the Tree node. I'm not sure if we would allow it for 3.4 or not.

Is there some way to add a compatibility property? I'm guessing not... anyways the release policy says:

Minor compatibility breakage in very specific areas may happen in minor versions, but the vast majority of projects should not be affected or require significant porting work.

I'm not sure, but I'd probably classify this as a minor compatibility breakage in very specific area.

As for the other issue, it depends on how close you've copied the implementation. And if you've ported the code from the current master, then it already includes all the fixes 🙃

No, I just git cherry-picked that specific commit (9c92e9d). I can't reproduce the bug though, so maybe it was caused by some optimizations in the 4.0 renderer or something. If it works fine, it works fine, I guess I was just wondering if it'd be a good idea to port #49085 anyways.

@YuriSizov
Copy link
Contributor

No, I just git cherry-picked that specific commit (9c92e9d). I can't reproduce the bug though, so maybe it was caused by some optimizations in the 4.0 renderer or something. If it works fine, it works fine, I guess I was just wondering if it'd be a good idea to port #49085 anyways.

It is possible that there were some changes to the Tree that made it not render the stuff far outside of the visible bound, but yeah, I would still port the most actual code. It would work in 3.x just as well.

Is there some way to add a compatibility property?

It's possible to somehow always fallback on the old property that exists in 3.x if none of the new are set to be above 0.

@AaronRecord
Copy link
Contributor Author

AaronRecord commented Jul 19, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Okay, I backported #49085 (I fixuped it so it'd be all one commit though since I had the opportunity).

@akien-mga akien-mga modified the milestones: 3.4, 3.5 Nov 8, 2021
@akien-mga akien-mga modified the milestones: 3.5, 3.x Jul 3, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
enhancement topic:editor topic:gui usability
Projects
None yet
Milestone
3.x
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@AaronRecord @YuriSizov @akien-mga