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

Do not hide timestamps on small viewports #376

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 4, 2016
Merged

Conversation

xPaw
Copy link
Member

@xPaw xPaw commented Jun 3, 2016

No description provided.

@xPaw xPaw added the Type: Feature Tickets that describe a desired feature or PRs that add them to the project. label Jun 3, 2016
@dgw
Copy link
Contributor

dgw commented Jun 3, 2016

👍 Should close #186 on merge.

@maxpoulin64
Copy link
Member

I'm not sure if that's just because I'm used to it or what, but it makes me feel like the interface is more bloated. Do we really want to have the timestamps visible all the time? I find that usually, it's only a few specific messages that I want to see when they were sent.

I was thinking, now that we have context menus, maybe we can either

  • Put an on/off toggle in the channel menu, so it's easy to access
  • Put it in the user context menu so people can manually check individual timestamps if wanted, kind of like that:
    screenshot_2016-06-03-18-47-08

I'll 👍 anyway as it's easy to revert with custom CSS

@astorije
Copy link
Member

astorije commented Jun 4, 2016

Yes! 👍

@astorije astorije merged commit 7a88aac into master Jun 4, 2016
@astorije astorije deleted the xpaw/mobile-time branch June 4, 2016 05:34
@xPaw xPaw added this to the 2.0.0 milestone Jun 5, 2016
matburnham pushed a commit to matburnham/lounge that referenced this pull request Sep 6, 2017
Do not hide timestamps on small viewports
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Type: Feature Tickets that describe a desired feature or PRs that add them to the project.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants