Addressed review
- Queries
- All Stories
- Search
- Advanced Search
- Transactions
- Transaction Logs
All Stories
May 18 2023
In D7793#232996, @michal wrote:Accepting, but please fix the icon before landing!
Address review
Not a fan of this from an accessibility stand point. I found something like this: focus-trap, we could wrap all our modals with it. But I'm not sure if that's worth it. @ashoat any thoughts?
Accepting, but please fix the icon before landing!
May 17 2023
Requesting changes only to get answer about using comm-services-lib
Confused about the most recent revision
I should have been more specific
Merged with D7824
Just a few more points about the buttons, otherwise looks good!
Addressed review
All other icons are filled in.
I can see that on figma that all buttons are outlines and there's a bar between reactions and the rest of the buttons. Not sure if it will be handled on some other occasion or if there's some more context on this, but I feel like they should be at least consistent.
It's true that diffs should be small, but that is just an "instrumental goal". The real goal is to make diffs readable and clear to reviewers, and usually small diffs are more readable and clear. But that's not always the case... often, splitting a diff into two can make it harder to review, especially if the two parts depend closely on each other. In this case I agree with @michal that it would be easier to review if D7824 and this diff were merged.
As far as I know, diffs should be small, and do only one thing. The division between those diffs is simple: one diff adds the button itself to the tooltip, and the other adds its functionality (entering edit state).
Also, this diff cannot depend on previous diffs, because it is first in the stack.
In D7814#232863, @marcin wrote:Handle aps dictionary.
Correctly calculate whether messageInfos should be included into notification payload
Handle aps dictionary.
Create new notification instead of mutating the existing one
Rebase
Rebase
In D7789#232531, @ashoat wrote:I was asking for links (hyperlinks) to the TypeScript types. In a previous comment I had requested:
Can you find the TypeScript types and try to base your new types on those, and make sure to include all relevant params?
Assuming you did that and found the TypeScript types, I'm now asking you to link those types. With the comments you left, it appears that some of them don't match, and I can't tell if they are TypeScript types or just other Flow types that we already have.
Rebase, validate uploadMediaMetadataResponder, fix bug with uploadDownloadResponder
Clearing tooltip after entering edit mode
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase
Rebase