• 
      

    Convert RB.UploadAttachmentView to TypeScript/spina/Ink.

    Review Request #14161 — Created Sept. 12, 2024 and submitted

    Information

    Review Board
    master

    Reviewers

    This change ports the UploadAttachmentView to TypeScript, and changes it
    so it now inherits from the new Ink.DialogView.

    • Ran js-tests.
    • Uploaded new file attachments.
    • Uploaded new versions of existing file attachments.
    Summary ID
    Convert RB.UploadAttachmentView to TypeScript/spina/Ink.
    This change ports the UploadAttachmentView to TypeScript, and changes it so it now inherits from the new `Ink.DialogView`. Testing Done: - Ran js-tests. - Uploaded new file attachments. - Uploaded new versions of existing file attachments.
    1a0b362020810215208a9c63eb89016dfc9cda49
    Description From Last Updated

    If we're doing an Ink release alongside 7.0.3, it would be nice to put this into 7.0.3. This'll fix some …

    maubinmaubin

    I think you meant to say "uploading" instead of "updating"? And maybe it's more apt to say "a file attachment" …

    maubinmaubin

    Same here.

    maubinmaubin

    Typo: "eceieved" -> "received"

    maubinmaubin

    To maintain API compatibility, we'll probably want to bring back show() in the definition.

    chipx86chipx86

    Oh also, given that we have RB.DialogView, maybe it'd make sense to keep subclassing that and extend that to use …

    chipx86chipx86

    This should probably be marked private.

    chipx86chipx86
    maubin
    1. 
        
    2. Show all issues

      If we're doing an Ink release alongside 7.0.3, it would be nice to put this into 7.0.3. This'll fix some ugliness on mobile where the upload attachment dialog is too big for the screen and gets cut off.

      1. Hmmm, I'm not sure. We'll have to see what Christian wants to do there.

    3. Show all issues

      I think you meant to say "uploading" instead of "updating"? And maybe it's more apt to say "a file attachment" instead of "file attachments" since we can really only upload one attachment at a time from this dialog.

    4. Show all issues

      Same here.

    5. Show all issues

      Typo: "eceieved" -> "received"

    6. 
        
    david
    maubin
    1. Ship It!
    2. 
        
    chipx86
    1. 
        
    2. Show all issues

      To maintain API compatibility, we'll probably want to bring back show() in the definition.

      1. Is this a place where we actually care about API compatibility? The show name already had a conflict with other base classes, and this seems like something that's a part of our UI implementation and not used by third parties.

      2. Maybe not. I just like to default to ensuring that. We can skip this.

    3. Show all issues

      This should probably be marked private.

    4. 
        
    chipx86
    1. 
        
    2. Show all issues

      Oh also, given that we have RB.DialogView, maybe it'd make sense to keep subclassing that and extend that to use Ink?

      1. I'd like to deprecate that. It's less flexible and trying to adapt that API into the new one would be awkward.

      2. That's fair.

    3. 
        
    chipx86
    1. Ship It!
    2. 
        
    david
    Review request changed
    Status:
    Completed
    Change Summary:
    Pushed to master (c6533c2)