Enlarge visible windows only in fullscreen method #2027
Conversation
|
Great PR! Please pay attention to the following items before merging: Files matching
This is an automatically generated QA checklist based on modified files |
|
@rakoenig please see #2027 (comment) and provide a manual verification test where we can see that working in action as we currently don't have automatic CI tests covering that behaviour. |
- So far this method was determining the window_id of the window to resize to fullscreen by limiting the list to 1 entry. This could select the wrong window, resulting in problems that https://progress.opensuse.org/issues/106514 wants to fix. - now we use --onlyvisible to select the visible window only.
rakoenig
force-pushed
the
fix_enable_fullscreen
branch
from
25cc857
to
f0702c0
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2027 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 77.53% 77.56% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 70 70
Lines 7265 7273 +8
==========================================
+ Hits 5633 5641 +8
Misses 1632 1632
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
@rakoenig Did you see this comment? |
Yes I saw it and I'm desperately trying to make a verification run. But so far what people suggested on the Slack-channel didn't work for me. Running the worker in the container was a complete fail. I'm a bit lost on how to tweak the workers from remote, but looks like there is not much of a documentation or even a tutorial about that stuff. |
|
@Martchus could you help rakoenig to get this tested? |
|
When I remember the chat history correctly, that change was actually tested (by manually logging in on the host and invoking the command manually). Hence I've also already approved the change and would say we can even merge it without further testing. If we really want to do further testing, I'd probably go for the approach documented here: https://progress.opensuse.org/projects/openqav3/wiki/#Use-a-production-host-for-testing-backend-changes-locally-eg-svirt-powerVM-IPMI-bare-metal-s390x-etc - This is the approach used so far when developing with the svirt backend. Alternatively, you can also hot-patch an instance. Take it out of production and apply a patch via (All other suggestions were only luring you into uncharted territory. They might be better in the long run but you'll have to figure out details on your own at this point.) |
See ticket: poo#109795 for details.