Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Combine .app-main and #main turbo-frame #497

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 19, 2024
Merged

Combine .app-main and #main turbo-frame #497

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 19, 2024

Conversation

spohlenz
Copy link
Member

A separate turbo-frame child element caused issues when elements expect to be within the .app-main flex container.

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Sep 19, 2024

Coverage Status

coverage: 91.475%. remained the same
when pulling c1a4544 on main-turbo-frame
into 9550a12 on main.

@spohlenz spohlenz merged commit e079b06 into main Sep 19, 2024
32 checks passed
@spohlenz spohlenz deleted the main-turbo-frame branch September 19, 2024 04:23
spohlenz added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 24, 2024
@spohlenz spohlenz mentioned this pull request Sep 24, 2024
spohlenz added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 26, 2024
* Separate .app-main and #main turbo-frame (reverting #497) but move turbo-frame into layout partial
* Remove turbo stream layout in order to apply more granular update behavior
* Introduce #content turbo-frame in layout partial and deprecate index_turbo_frame
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants