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

Fixes and alternates for #5737 #5764

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from

Conversation

johnhaddon
Copy link
Member

@johnhaddon johnhaddon commented Apr 3, 2024

This contains fixups addressing my review comments on #5737. Usually I wouldn't be doing this myself, but given that we want to include this in today's release, I thought it was worth getting something concrete up. There are a few categories of things...

Fixups : 7719c2e and 755ea10 are fixups for comments I made on the original PR. I'm pretty sure these are legit, and should be included.
Metadata prefixing : bcb073a adds a prefix to the new metadata name, to make it clear it only applies to LabelPlugValueWidget. This matches our convention for most other widgets, but is very wordy. I think we should probably include it, but maybe that's open to debate.
Completely different approach : ad9a78b removes the metadata and just stops using LabelPlugValueWidget in the RampPlugValueWidget. It's simpler overall, but does result in a reduction in functionality for the user (no right-click menu on the labels). Probably isn't the way we want to go, but I wanted to provide it for consideration at least.

ericmehl and others added 7 commits April 3, 2024 12:19
@ericmehl
Copy link
Collaborator

ericmehl commented Apr 3, 2024

I think we should probably include it, but maybe that's open to debate.

I'm inclined to include it despite being a bit long. I didn't include it originally since the other metadata on LabelPlugValueWidget isn't prefixed, but matching the overall convention seems good.

Probably isn't the way we want to go, but I wanted to provide it for consideration at least.

My vote is to go with the metadata solution. Reducing the functionality combined with what to me is a less elegant approach to the code steers me to the metadata option. But happy to discuss.

@murraystevenson
Copy link
Contributor

My vote is to go with the metadata solution. Reducing the functionality combined with what to me is a less elegant approach to the code steers me to the metadata option. But happy to discuss.

Cool, it does seem worth keeping the existing functionality. @ericmehl could you please get this ready to merge minus the last commit?

@murraystevenson
Copy link
Contributor

Closing as the fixes (without the last commit) have been merged in #5737

@johnhaddon johnhaddon deleted the valueChangedFixFixes branch April 25, 2024 15:47
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.

3 participants