Bug 1333172 - differ between route hostname and navigation within the console

[jhadvig]

Making difference between route hostname and navigation within the console more obvious, by prepending the pficon-route icon before the exposed route link.

Screen prepending the icon(which I like more then the appending one):

Screen appending the icon:

Also I've created a standalone class for the icon font-size since by default it will take the size of h2 style which is 19px and that seems to be too big for the icon.

@liggitt suggested we use the fa-external-link icon instead the pficon-route as original was suggested:

@jwforres PTAL

[jhadvig]

Will add bindata after review :)

[jwforres]

@rhamilto this is something you could help with, is there really no way for us to get an icon on the right of the route without it disappearing in some cases :(

[rhamilto]

@rhamilto this is something you could help with, is there really no way for us to get an icon on the right of the route without it disappearing in some cases :(

@jwforres given the complexity of the layout, I was unable to find a reliable, consistent solution for the warning icon since there are so many different layout permutations at the various screen resolutions... :(

spitballing here... what if we included the protocol (e.g., http://) instead of an icon in this context?

[jhadvig]

@rhamilto I like the idea of including the protocol. Would either go with that or prefixing with external-link icon .
@jwforres @spadgett thoughts ?

[jwforres]

so we have non http(s) route ports coming soon and we wouldn't know what
protocol to show there, we'll only know generically that it is a TCP port.

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 7:40 AM, Jakub Hadvig [email protected]
wrote:

@rhamilto https://github.com/rhamilto I like the idea of including the
protocol. Would either go with that or prefixing with external-link icon .
@jwforres https://github.com/jwforres @spadgett
https://github.com/spadgett thoughts ?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#2 (comment)

[rhamilto]

so we have non http(s) route ports coming soon and we wouldn't know what
protocol to show there, we'll only know generically that it is a TCP port.

Will a hyperlink even make sense in those cases?

[jwforres]

true it wont be a link anymore

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 8:48 AM, Robb Hamilton [email protected]
wrote:

so we have non http(s) route ports coming soon and we wouldn't know what
protocol to show there, we'll only know generically that it is a TCP port.

Will a hyperlink even make sense in those cases?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#2 (comment)

[jhadvig]

@jwforres @rhamilto Ive updated the PR based on our chat. PTAL

[rhamilto]

Works for me.

[jwforres]

looks good, run grunt build and check in the dist/* changes

and go ahead and backport the change to ose/master (you'll still need bindata.go there)

[jhadvig]

@jwforres updated

[jwforres]

[merge]

[openshift-bot]

Origin Web Console Merge Results: SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/merge_pull_requests_origin_web_console/5/)

[openshift-bot]

Evaluated for origin web console merge up to 8527558