-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 667
add extension to contribute arbitrary pages #1668
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
add extension to contribute arbitrary pages #1668
Conversation
spadgett
left a comment
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.
/lgtm
/approve
|
@christianvogt How do we handle shared routes for use cases where we want two different perspectives to share the same view using this plugin? Is there a way for the plugin to say that I want to reuse a particular view from main console app but in a different perspective? |
e57e9a2 to
1e277dc
Compare
|
@rohitkrai03 It was decided a while back that the dev perspective is just a customized nav. So all views are available to all perspectives. |
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
| }, | ||
| { | ||
| type: 'ResourcePage/Detail', | ||
| type: 'Page/Resource/Details', |
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.
nitpick: Why plural, please?
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 are several references in code to both detail and details (more plural); with no apparent consistency. It seemed to me the choice for plural made more sense as per the contents of the pages containing several sections under a tabbed navigation. This to me implied several details as oppose to a single all inclusive detail about the resource.
If there is a particular reason to use the singular form, I'm happy to go with that as I am unfamiliar with the history of this repo.
@spadgett thoughts?
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.
Like @christianvogt, I have a preference for "details." It's not a single detail. Resources have many properties. It's many details :)
There's no particular history that I'm aware of. We should try to be consistent.
|
/retest |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: christianvogt, jtomasek, spadgett, vojtechszocs The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
Adds extension to allow plugins to contribute pages which render arbitrary react components. This is required by the dev console to render pages that are not based on a single resource and therefore cannot be contributed through the existing resource list / details page extensions.
Changes
resourceDetailPagestoresourceDetailsPagestypeof existing extensionsResourcePage/ListandResourcePage/Detail/cc @vojtechszocs @spadgett
fyi @jtomasek @rohitkrai03