Closed Bug 1181685 Opened 11 years ago Closed 11 years ago

Reconcile main UI element names and give them appropriate ID's for testing

Categories

(Tree Management :: Treeherder, defect, P3)

defect

Tracking

(Not tracked)

VERIFIED FIXED

People

(Reporter: jfrench, Assigned: jfrench)

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

46 bytes, text/x-github-pull-request
wlach
: review+
Details | Review
So mozwebqa has kindly got a preliminary test running for Treeherder, and that process revealed that we should probably have some clearer names and consistent IDs for some of the main Treeherder UI rather than elements like 'bottom-left-bottom'. It should help test authoring, and perhaps general webdev recognition. For starters, I pose we have something like: #details-panel* (the entire panel which opens when you click on a job... currently 'bottom-panel') #pinboard-panel [unchanged] #job-panel (currently 'bottom-panel-content', houses these items below...) #job-details-panel (currently 'bottom-left-panel', houses these items...) #job-details-actionbar (the left navbar section containing the 'Log' icon, etc) #job-details-pane (currently 'bottom-left-bottom' containing our omnipresent info) #job-tabs-panel (currently 'bottom-center-panel', houses these items...) #job-tabs-navbar (currently 'bottom-center-top') #job-tabs-pane (currently 'bottom-center-bottom') * some other possibles for the main container: edit-panel info-panel awesome-panel ...some of these we can also reference to users with equivalent names in a potential diagram in Help, calling out the various UI parts of Treeherder and what they do.
Soliciting a few folks for feedback on the proposed names above :)
Assignee: nobody → tojonmz
Status: NEW → ASSIGNED
Flags: needinfo?(wlachance)
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Flags: needinfo?(cdawson)
This all sounds fine to me. For the main container, maybe resultset-panel makes sense? That's what it contains: resultsets.
Flags: needinfo?(wlachance)
Yup, that sounds good to me.
I like will's idea, too. And the rest of the names sound great to me. :) We named these early on when we weren't totally sure what each of them would be used for, so position seemed logical at the time. :)
Flags: needinfo?(cdawson)
Flags: needinfo?(ryanvm)
Thank you, sounds like we're good to go. I can adjust further if required in my PR :)
This is great- and it'll definitely make testing and onboarding contributors easier.
(In reply to Jonathan French (:jfrench) from comment #0) > * some other possibles for the main container: > info-panel I've actually opted for 'info-panel' for the entire lower panel unless anyone objects. It seems a bit more generalized and doesn't overuse the word 'details'; which is being used for its child, job-details.
Attached file PR 740
Please see above PR for status and review.
Attachment #8632142 - Flags: review?(wlachance)
Comment on attachment 8632142 [details] [review] PR 740 Looks fine to me. Since this touches just about everything to do with the UI, should we do a quick run through the moztrap checklist before landing?
Attachment #8632142 - Flags: review?(wlachance) → review+
Sure, I did a bunch of testing as I added the changes, but I'll do a more formal moztrap run now.
https://moztrap.mozilla.org/runtests/run/7591/env/27938/ I think we're ok for deployment to stage, so I plan to rebase and merge.
Marking fixed per above merge. I'll verify on the next push to stage.
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 11 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Verified fixed on both stage and production.
Status: RESOLVED → VERIFIED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: