From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <d.csapak@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DE5347BF55 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:03:26 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CE90513EFF for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:02:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id 6231613EF0 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:02:56 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2609D459D5; Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:02:56 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <88b0c551-3735-6be2-fa09-1fa6cbafe4f5@proxmox.com> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 2021 14:02:54 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:94.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/94.0 Content-Language: en-US To: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>, Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com> References: <20211011125520.1124937-1-s.reiter@proxmox.com> <20211011125520.1124937-3-s.reiter@proxmox.com> <7e6e5b21-e153-e847-a579-3a38610c8b25@proxmox.com> From: Dominik Csapak <d.csapak@proxmox.com> In-Reply-To: <7e6e5b21-e153-e847-a579-3a38610c8b25@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 1.527 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment NICE_REPLY_A -2.549 Looks like a legit reply (A) SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Subject: Re: [pve-devel] applied: [PATCH manager 2/3] ui: SystemEdit: promote advanced settings to normal X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2021 13:03:26 -0000 On 10/21/21 13:51, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > On 11.10.21 14:55, Stefan Reiter wrote: >> and reorder the panel a bit, as otherwise I found it *very* cluttered. >> >> Signed-off-by: Stefan Reiter <s.reiter@proxmox.com> >> --- >> www/manager6/qemu/SystemEdit.js | 50 +++++++++++++++------------------ >> 1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 28 deletions(-) >> >> > > applied, thanks! > > But I still find that the visual separation of the hr + space of the advanced section > provided some UX improvement, felt less crowded that way. > > Maybe we can place that in a box+<legend>Firmware</legend> could work, would have to test > thingy or at least have a > Label-only element with "Firmware" in columnt 1 and an empty element in column 2 to > somewhat replicate that visual grouping? > we do it like that already for the sync edit options in the realmedit, so maybe we should stay consistent here and use the same style? if you want, i can send a patch for this