Circulars Archive Group View #2617
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2617 +/- ##
========================================
- Coverage 6.23% 6.18% -0.05%
========================================
Files 167 170 +3
Lines 4219 4298 +79
Branches 465 479 +14
========================================
+ Hits 263 266 +3
- Misses 3954 4030 +76
Partials 2 2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Courey
force-pushed
the
courey/grouping
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e64cd81
to
d91fa13
Compare
|
Added "Open/Close All" button on group overview page as requested by @jracusin |
That was the plan as I said in the original PR description:
I rebased and took the PR out of draft status. |
adds validation and error handling fixes tests adds modal warning prior to delete changes removal button to words instead of only icons code review change requests removing unused className formatting autofill moderator synonym eventId selector adding create sad path test removing feature flag check adding a 3 second debounce Adds grouped view to circulars archive index adds missing route and flag checks
Courey
force-pushed
the
courey/grouping
branch
from
f425a78
to
e53c732
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
First, some high-level UX feedback:
- Please use numbered lists, not bulleted lists, for Circulars in the index view. The list number value should be the Circular number.
- For now, don't have disclosure arrows on the per-group page. Just display all of the Circulars belonging to the group. We can fine-tune the UI to quickly navigate within a group in a future PR.
|
Removed details element from group overview: Made ul an ol with circularId values: |
| @@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ export const AstroDataContext = createContext<AstroDataContextProps>({}) | |||
| /** | |||
| * An Astro Flavored Markdown enriched link. | |||
| */ | |||
| // eslint-disable-next-line react/display-name | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why was this addition necessary?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
when I moved the component into the components directory, it is judged as a component definition and causes this warning:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was trying to make the move have no changes to the code if possible
| @@ -53,6 +64,7 @@ export default function PaginationSelectionFooter({ | |||
| page={page} | |||
| limit={limit} | |||
| totalPages={totalPages} | |||
| view={view} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why does the Pagination component need to know about the view?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
because in getPageLink if the view is not set as a search param, then when it creates the link, it doesn't include view. If it doesn't include view, then the view defaults to index. If it's always index, then the pagination links will never work for groups. To show you what I mean, here is what happens when I remove the view from getPageLinks. When I hover over the 2 button, this is the link. You will see that it doesn't include the view so when that page is navigated to, it's the index view which is the default.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, I see.
The last time that I looked at this component, I noticed that a lot of apparently separate concerns were leaking into it from pages that use it. At some point, I'd like to come back to this and try to refactor it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think that's a good idea. It did feel odd to have to add view specific code to it.
Instead of the boxes, could we just put a horizontal rule between Circulars for now? |
This work is based off #2538 and will be turned into a non-draft PR once that work has been merged in and I rebase off main.
Description
This work includes:
Related Issue(s)
Resolves #2544
Testing
This has been thoroughly manually tested locally, but should be tested on dev WITHOUT the feature flag on to ensure that no existing functionality has broken.
Images