change inlineEditor() so it can be enabled/disabled
Review Request #3560 — Created Nov. 25, 2012 and submitted
The purpose of this change is to allow enabling/disabling of the '.editable' fields of a review request.
Note: -testing was performed in latest version of Chrome and Firefox. -testing was performed with input in all of the fields as well as in none of the fields. Expected behaviour: Review request fields should be disabled when the review request is in a non-editable state(submitted/discarded) Review request fields should be enabled when the review request is in a editable state(draft/public) * Brand new, not yet published: discard-review-request button: review request fields cleared and disabled as expected. discard-review-request link: review request fields cleared and disabled as expected. Publish: review request fields remain enabled as expected. * Published and unchanged: close-discarded-review-request link: review request fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request. close-submitted-review request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request. * Discarded: close-discarded-review-request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request. * Reopened after discarded: review request fields are enabled as expected. * Submitted: close-submitted-review request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request. * Reopened after submitted: review request fields are enabled and set to the upstream review request. Behaves as expected for requests that were submitted as drafts as well as public.
Description | From | Last Updated |
---|---|---|
Should be listed alphabetically. |
chipx86 | |
Seems redundant with this.options.enable. |
chipx86 | |
Only one blank line. |
chipx86 | |
You can't have both, and it's a boolean, so just do a standard if/else. |
chipx86 | |
No blank line. |
chipx86 | |
Add a blank line. |
chipx86 | |
I'm not wild about different things controlling this setting. I'm also not sure we should be able to be in … |
chipx86 | |
Blank line. |
chipx86 | |
It doesn't make sense to go into edit mode when disabled. |
chipx86 | |
So, I think Christian was saying before that if we set this to be enabled instead of enable, we can … |
mike_conley | |
Let's not add a trailing comma if we don't need it. |
mike_conley | |
Remove this newline. |
mike_conley | |
So we won't need this anymore, since this.options.enabled will default to true. |
mike_conley | |
This function needs documentation. |
mike_conley | |
Use this.options.enabled instead. |
mike_conley | |
space after if |
mike_conley | |
Set this.options.enabled instead. |
mike_conley | |
This function needs documentation. |
mike_conley | |
use this.options.enabled |
mike_conley | |
Set this.options.enabled |
mike_conley | |
No need for this newline. |
mike_conley | |
Same line |
DD ddruska | |
Blank line. |
chipx86 | |
Just a nit - these comments don't need to be broken up so short. 80 chars is our limit, so … |
mike_conley | |
It's true, that's what this does, and that's good info to have, but the summary of this function should be … |
chipx86 | |
Here too. |
chipx86 | |
Here too. |
chipx86 | |
Same as above. |
mike_conley | |
Missing period. |
chipx86 | |
Here too. |
chipx86 | |
Be careful with your spacing. There should have been a space before "else". Consistency matters. |
chipx86 | |
And here. |
chipx86 |
- Change Summary:
-
Again modified logic of enable/disable functions. TODO: document enable and disable functions.
- Diff:
-
Revision 3 (+38 -5)
- Change Summary:
-
-Inline Documentation for enable and disable functions. - Modified logic of enable and disable functions.
- Diff:
-
Revision 4 (+35 -4)
-
So disabling and enabling an inlineEditor seems to work. Good job! I am noticing, however, that if I have an inlineEditor, if I edit it, press OK, and then edit it again, the text field is significantly shorter than it was before, and the buttons appear on the next line. Steps to reproduce: -Create a new review request -Click the pencil next to summary, type something in, press enter -Click on the pencil again I'm experiencing this on Ubuntu 12.04 using Firefox. Are you seeing the same thing?
-
Just a nit - these comments don't need to be broken up so short. 80 chars is our limit, so I think you have some more space here.
-
- Change Summary:
-
-Addressed style raised issues. -Changed documentation for enable and disable functions. -Included a 'testing done' section. TODO: reproduce issue Mike is running into.
- Testing Done:
-
+ Note:
+ -testing was performed in latest version of Chrome and Firefox. + -testing was performed with input in all of the fields as well as in none of the fields. + + Expected behaviour:
+ Review request fields should be disabled when the review request is in a non-editable state(submitted/discarded) + Review request fields should be enabled when the review request is in a editable state(draft/public) + + -
Brand new, not yet published:
discard-review-request button: review request fields cleared and disabled as expected.
discard-review-request link: review request fields cleared and disabled as expected.
Publish: review request fields remain enabled as expected.
+ -
Published and unchanged:
close-discarded-review-request link: review request fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request.
close-submitted-review request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request.
+ -
Discarded:
close-discarded-review-request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request.
+ -
Reopened after discarded:
review request fields are enabled as expected.
+ -
Submitted:
close-submitted-review request link: '.editable' fields are disabled and set to the upstream review request.
+ -
Reopened after submitted:
review request fields are enabled and set to the upstream review request. Behaves as expected for requests that were submitted as drafts as well as public.
-
- Diff:
-
Revision 5 (+35 -4)