|
|
|
Service view header should match design doc
The service view header should match visual design document.
(https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqS19SYWQ2MzU3cFU/edit)
https://code.launchpad.net/~tveronezi/juju-gui/service-header/+merge/130243
(do not edit description out of merge proposal)
Patch Set 1 #
Total comments: 44
Patch Set 2 : Service view header should match design doc #
Total comments: 4
Patch Set 3 : Service view header should match design doc #
Total messages: 8
|
thiago
Please take a look.
|
13 years, 2 months ago (2012年10月17日 22:11:30 UTC) #1 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please take a look.
Hi Thiago. This does look a lot better, you are right. I have a lot of comments, below. I also made a branch to try and help out with some, but not all, of the CSS comments. feel free to merge or simply peruse and cherrypick, as you wish. lp:~gary/juju-gui/service-header Gary https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... File app/templates/service-header.partial (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... app/templates/service-header.partial:15: <a href="{{href}}">{{title}}</a> These are supposed to be orange if the tab is active. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... app/templates/service-header.partial:17: <div {{#if active}}class="active"{{/if}}> I'd prefer not to have this div if we could help it. Not a huge deal, but it seems to me that we could simply have colored bottom borders on the ".menu-items .inline.item"s to do this. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebars File app/templates/service.handlebars (left): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:11: <div> Thanks for cleaning up the tabs. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebars File app/templates/service.handlebars (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:16: </a> This duplicates code that you have in service-footer.partial. Please refactor to not duplicate. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:20: <div class="filter-control"> This is done with a dropdown in the mockup. However, I prefer what you have here (except that I expect the buttons need to be orange or somesuch). I'd run this past Nick/Jovan and get their take. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js File app/views/environment.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js#newcod... app/views/environment.js:101: } What are these changes to environment.js doing? They seem completely unrelated. If this is work you did, please separate it. If this is work from another branch, please remove it. Since this kind of thing has happened before, I'll add that I try to always review the entire diff I am about to submit before submitting it, to make sure I don't see anything that shouldn't be there for one reason or another, or if I've missed anything. I suggest adding this to your process, if it is not there already. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js#newcod... app/views/environment.js:1201: this.set('translate', evt.translate.slice(0)); I didn't comment on any of the changes above. Everything in this file should go, I think. It doesn't belong in this branch, one way or the other. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js File app/views/service.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode387 app/views/service.js:387: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), you get the charm info below in line 390. This is a decent amount of work--much more than an attribute access, for instance. Please stash the renderable charm in a variable and then use it here and in line 390. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode569 app/views/service.js:569: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), used again in line 579. stash and reuse. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode648 app/views/service.js:648: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), Used again in line 651. Stash and reuse. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode820 app/views/service.js:820: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), Used again in line 822. Stash and reuse. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less File lib/views/stylesheet.less (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:844: .juju-service-info-container-bottom-menu { The rest of the file uses four space indents. When in Rome, do as the Romans. Don't make a file's stylistic conventions internally inconsistent. Similarly, don't change a file's stylistic conventions within without discussion, and if you do change them, change the whole file to match the new style. I have a branch that fixes this, and resolves a conflict with trunk. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:880: height: 111px; This makes the area too big: the total height should be 111px, and this makes it 38 + 111 = 149px. I have corrected in my branch. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:884: font-style: regular; This is not a valid font-style. I think you are looking for "normal." It is still unnecessary. I have removed it in my branch. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:885: font-size: 22px; fill: #292929; I think you want color. Fixed in my branch. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:889: padding-top: 18px; The guidelines (https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqS19SYWQ2MzU3cFU/edit) show 18 pixels line height for the main name, not 18 pixels of space. However, just eyeballing the image, that's clearly not what's going on--it's closer to 30 pixels. I removed this and gave a height of 28 to the first child, which seemed to approximate the image better. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:892: font-size: 16px; fill: #6a737b; fill only does something for svg, I believe. You want color. Fixed in my branch. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:900: background: url(/juju-ui/assets/images/tab_div.png) repeat; Can't this just be a bottom border? Maybe not, but the "active" one below really seems like it ought to be a border. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:905: font-style: medium; There is no "medium" font-style. I'm not sure what you were after. I deleted it. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:906: font-size: 12px; fill: #dd4814; Same problem with fill. You already have color. deleted. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:920: background: url(/juju-ui/assets/images/tab_marker.png) repeat; Is that image really more than a solid color? it doesn't look like it. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:957: font-family: @font-family; I have a feeling that all the many uses of @font-family are unnecessary, now that we have it in the body, but I didn't feel like digging in and verifying. Do it if you like.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... File app/templates/service-header.partial (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... app/templates/service-header.partial:15: <a href="{{href}}">{{title}}</a> On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > These are supposed to be orange if the tab is active. Hmmm... You know I am colour-blind and the specification shows the same colour code. I will ask goodspud. https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqS19SYWQ2MzU3cFU/edit https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service-header.pa... app/templates/service-header.partial:17: <div {{#if active}}class="active"{{/if}}> On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > I'd prefer not to have this div if we could help it. Not a huge deal, but it > seems to me that we could simply have colored bottom borders on the ".menu-items > .inline.item"s to do this. I use the image assets as required, so I need this div in order to set the background image from the asset. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebars File app/templates/service.handlebars (left): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:11: <div> On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Thanks for cleaning up the tabs. ok https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebars File app/templates/service.handlebars (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:16: </a> On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > This duplicates code that you have in service-footer.partial. Please refactor > to not duplicate. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/templates/service.handlebar... app/templates/service.handlebars:20: <div class="filter-control"> On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > This is done with a dropdown in the mockup. However, I prefer what you have > here (except that I expect the buttons need to be orange or somesuch). I'd run > this past Nick/Jovan and get their take. We want the buttons. The mockup is outdated. There is a new card for the buttons style. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js File app/views/environment.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js#newcod... app/views/environment.js:101: } On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > What are these changes to environment.js doing? They seem completely unrelated. > If this is work you did, please separate it. If this is work from another > branch, please remove it. Since this kind of thing has happened before, I'll > add that I try to always review the entire diff I am about to submit before > submitting it, to make sure I don't see anything that shouldn't be there for one > reason or another, or if I've missed anything. I suggest adding this to your > process, if it is not there already. I have no idea why this thing is here. Maybe it is due to the recent trunk dance we had... and it may confused lbox? This code is in the trunk anyway. If I remove it from here, I will remove it from the trunk, right? https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/environment.js#newcod... app/views/environment.js:1201: this.set('translate', evt.translate.slice(0)); On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > I didn't comment on any of the changes above. Everything in this file should > go, I think. It doesn't belong in this branch, one way or the other. Ditto above https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js File app/views/service.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode387 app/views/service.js:387: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > you get the charm info below in line 390. This is a decent amount of work--much > more than an attribute access, for instance. Please stash the renderable charm > in a variable and then use it here and in line 390. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode569 app/views/service.js:569: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > used again in line 579. stash and reuse. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode648 app/views/service.js:648: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Used again in line 651. Stash and reuse. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/app/views/service.js#newcode820 app/views/service.js:820: this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), app)), On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Used again in line 822. Stash and reuse. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less File lib/views/stylesheet.less (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:844: .juju-service-info-container-bottom-menu { On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > The rest of the file uses four space indents. When in Rome, do as the Romans. > Don't make a file's stylistic conventions internally inconsistent. Similarly, > don't change a file's stylistic conventions within without discussion, and if > you do change them, change the whole file to match the new style. > > I have a branch that fixes this, and resolves a conflict with trunk. Not on purpose. My formatter wasn't well configured. Sorry about that. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:880: height: 111px; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > This makes the area too big: the total height should be 111px, and this makes it > 38 + 111 = 149px. I have corrected in my branch. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:884: font-style: regular; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > This is not a valid font-style. I think you are looking for "normal." It is > still unnecessary. I have removed it in my branch. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:885: font-size: 22px; fill: #292929; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > I think you want color. Fixed in my branch. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:889: padding-top: 18px; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > The guidelines > (https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqS19SYWQ2MzU3cFU/edit) > show 18 pixels line height for the main name, not 18 pixels of space. However, > just eyeballing the image, that's clearly not what's going on--it's closer to 30 > pixels. I removed this and gave a height of 28 to the first child, which seemed > to approximate the image better. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:892: font-size: 16px; fill: #6a737b; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > fill only does something for svg, I believe. You want color. Fixed in my > branch. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:900: background: url(/juju-ui/assets/images/tab_div.png) repeat; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Can't this just be a bottom border? Maybe not, but the "active" one below > really seems like it ought to be a border. I should use the assets. These are the assets that I have: https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqTjdsc3Q4TmdnTE0/edit https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:905: font-style: medium; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > There is no "medium" font-style. I'm not sure what you were after. I deleted > it. I was just following the https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqS19SYWQ2MzU3cFU/edit https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:906: font-size: 12px; fill: #dd4814; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Same problem with fill. You already have color. deleted. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:920: background: url(/juju-ui/assets/images/tab_marker.png) repeat; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > Is that image really more than a solid color? it doesn't look like it. I should use the assets. These are the assets that I have: https://docs.google.com/a/canonical.com/file/d/0B6l8lFdCRvtqTjdsc3Q4TmdnTE0/edit https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/1/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newco... lib/views/stylesheet.less:957: font-family: @font-family; On 2012年10月18日 21:19:07, gary.poster wrote: > I have a feeling that all the many uses of @font-family are unnecessary, now > that we have it in the body, but I didn't feel like digging in and verifying. > Do it if you like. You are right. Thanks.
Please take a look.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js File app/views/service.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js#newcode655 app/views/service.js:655: charm: renderableCharm} the charm is referenced by id only in the templates, so all of these only need charm_id: service.get('charm') ie. the renderable_charm call here is extraneous. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js#newcode822 app/views/service.js:822: var renderableCharm = this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), renderableCharm/renderedCharm these lines could be removed afaics, and made internal to the getServiceTabs and since its only needs app.getModelURL(this.get('charm')) the call to renderable_charm can be omitted.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js File app/views/service.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js#newcode655 app/views/service.js:655: charm: renderableCharm} On 2012年10月19日 19:36:04, hazmat wrote: > the charm is referenced by id only in the templates, so all of these only need > charm_id: service.get('charm') > > ie. the renderable_charm call here is extraneous. Done. https://codereview.appspot.com/6724059/diff/5002/app/views/service.js#newcode822 app/views/service.js:822: var renderableCharm = this.renderable_charm(service.get('charm'), On 2012年10月19日 19:36:04, hazmat wrote: > renderableCharm/renderedCharm > > these lines could be removed afaics, and made internal to the getServiceTabs and > since its only needs app.getModelURL(this.get('charm')) the call to > renderable_charm can be omitted. Done.
