| Summary: | Apply a fade out animation when selecting / deselecting from tables when sorted by the "Included" column | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Build System, Metadata & Runtime] Hob | Reporter: | Belen Barros Pena <belen.barros.pena> |
| Component: | hob | Assignee: | Cristiana Voicu <cristiana.voicu> |
| Status: | VERIFIED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | enhancement | ||
| Priority: | Medium | CC: | belen.barros.pena, cristian.iorga, jessica.zhang, poky.bs.watcher, poky.watcher, valentin.popa |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | 1.5 M1 | ||
| Hardware: | x86 | ||
| OS: | Multiple | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| OS type for building Yocto: | --- | Type of Regression: | --- |
| Verified: | Documentation change: | --- | |
|
Description
Belen Barros Pena
2013-04-18 13:55:15 UTC
assigning to Cristiana, since she was responsible for all the sorting-related work. Hi Belen, As it is implemented the current fadeing animation for "Included recipes/packages", after you deselect something, the table will be sorted by recipe name, so it will lose the sorting column. Should we keep the same behaviour for the others tab? What I mean is that for e.g. in "All recipes" tab is it is sorted by Included, after you deselect an item , it would be selected by Name. From the development point of view, it is easier to keep the same behaviour. Let me know your opinion. Thanks! (In reply to comment #2) > Hi Belen, > > As it is implemented the current fadeing animation for "Included > recipes/packages", after you deselect something, the table will be sorted by > recipe name, so it will lose the sorting column. You are right: I hadn't notice that. I did see this functionality groups together at the top of the table all recipes / packages that will be removed: I guess it was done to give some visibility of what will be removed. But I don't understand why the sorting has to change after that. Should we keep the same > behaviour for the others tab? What I mean is that for e.g. in "All recipes" > tab is it is sorted by Included, after you deselect an item , it would be > selected by Name. > From the development point of view, it is easier to keep the same behaviour. > Let me know your opinion. I don't think we should. When my table is sorted by other than 'Name', it's because I have expressly changed the sorting criteria. If Hob overrides my wishes every time I change something, I will probably end up quite annoyed with Hob ;) Do you think we can extend the fix to the Included tabs, or should I open a (minor) bug? Thanks! Hi Belen, My opinion is to implement the fade out mechanism in the same way it is implemented in the other part, and then open a new bug to change its behaviour. Sounds ok for you? Cristiana (In reply to comment #4) > Hi Belen, > > My opinion is to implement the fade out mechanism in the same way it is > implemented in the other part, and then open a new bug to change its > behaviour. > Sounds ok for you? Sounds perfectly reasonable. Have opened bug 4453 with M3 milestone and assigned to you. Feel free to change milestone / assignee as needed. Cheers Belen > Cristiana merged to master http://git.yoctoproject.org/cgit/cgit.cgi/poky/commit/?id=da34a8db498a4a332e807f20feee961a99aad004 verified on 676fd3f394a0c0576b63c77ed2184bf5f42c29b6 |