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

Redesign members list #497

Closed
ara4n opened this issue Dec 11, 2015 · 5 comments
Closed

Redesign members list #497

ara4n opened this issue Dec 11, 2015 · 5 comments

Comments

@ara4n
Copy link
Member

ara4n commented Dec 11, 2015

  • Move invite to bottom
  • Show the first N members, with a "(...) 542 more" at bottom
  • Put search bar on top (optional?)
@ara4n ara4n modified the milestone: v0 Dec 13, 2015
@ara4n ara4n self-assigned this Dec 13, 2015
@ara4n
Copy link
Member Author

ara4n commented Jan 13, 2016

New plan: leave invite at top, but name it "Invite / Search".

@ara4n ara4n assigned kegsay and unassigned ara4n Jan 13, 2016
@ara4n
Copy link
Member Author

ara4n commented Jan 13, 2016

Also going to ensure that we literally show only one page of members, making room at the bottom for invited members to always be visible.

@kegsay
Copy link
Contributor

kegsay commented Jan 13, 2016

Related: #509

Braindumping from IRL:

  • Limit the number of MemberTiles and overflow the rest to a "and X more" tile.
  • If there are no invites pending, this list can occupy all the space it does currently.
  • If there ARE invites pending, this list should occupy ~80% and the invite section should be "sticky" at the bottom and occupy ~20%. We can programatically work this out because the MemberTiles have a constant height (so it becomes Math.floor((heightAvailable * 0.8) / heightOfTile) tiles)

@ara4n
Copy link
Member Author

ara4n commented Jan 21, 2016

I experimented with making the invites section 'sticky' using flexbox, and whilst it's doable, it feels a bit weird to have so many different scrolling areas in the panel and non-integer cut-off EntityTiles between the joined & invited sections. So I think the original plan as per the previous comment is probably still the best.

@kegsay
Copy link
Contributor

kegsay commented Jan 21, 2016

Now that we have "and X more" that concludes this bug afaik. Closing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants