-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
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
Implement Section Configure Modal #15
Implement Section Configure Modal #15
Conversation
a996739
to
08844b4
Compare
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## navin/course-outline/section #15 +/- ##
===============================================================
Coverage ? 88.53%
===============================================================
Files ? 485
Lines ? 7530
Branches ? 1600
===============================================================
Hits ? 6667
Misses ? 834
Partials ? 29 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
<FormattedMessage {...messages.hideFromLearners} /> | ||
</Form.Checkbox> | ||
<hr /> | ||
{showWarning && ( |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In the spec, it seems that rendering the alert not-live is unintended, and instead can be derived from the current state of the checkbox.
if checked: displays message (strange legacy behaviour: warning appears only on following renders only )
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for mentioning this and reminding me about it because I wanted to bring it up.
In the legacy behavior, the warning is displayed if the section is already hidden from learners. We warn the cms user that some previously hidden content will be displayed. This seems sensible to me.
Toggling the warning based on the state of the checkbox feels somewhat off. Especially if the initial state is the content being not hidden. I thought we could maybe raise this point. What do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@CefBoud This looks good, save for a few nits. 👍
- I tested the update behaviour and compared it with the legacy behaviour.
- I read through the code
98fdf30
to
8734daa
Compare
9c972de
to
06908a5
Compare
8734daa
to
61ff8f4
Compare
06908a5
to
2a1e872
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@CefBoud 👍
- I tested this: locally tested configure modal
- I read through the code
- I checked for accessibility issues: I am not able to focus via keyboard on save button from basic tab due to focus getting stuck inside Time picker. It seems to be an issue with DatePicker from react-datepicker which is not related to this PR.
-
Includes documentation
61ff8f4
to
6567ed9
Compare
2a1e872
to
bccaf1f
Compare
Intro
This MR implements the Section Configure modal.
Dependens on:
Private ref
BB-8218
Testing instructions:
make cms-up
in devstack.Screenshots