From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 6A43D9708C for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:09:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 220C57816 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:09:11 +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 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:09:10 +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 BBAC6467B1 for ; Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:09:09 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 12:09:09 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:110.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/110.0 Content-Language: en-US To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com From: Dominik Csapak Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 2.564 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 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI -5 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, high trust 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] [PATCH v3 widget-toolkit 1/2] repo view: replace non-clickable checkbox with icons X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2023 11:09:11 -0000 On 1/26/23 11:47, Lukas Wagner wrote: > From a usability view, having a checkbox that is not clickable is pretty > misleading, especially if the visual style is exactly the same as in > other places in the UI where the checkbox is functional. > > Signed-off-by: Lukas Wagner > --- > src/Utils.js | 2 ++ > src/node/APTRepositories.js | 6 ++---- > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/src/Utils.js b/src/Utils.js > index ef0c2b8..a6dd314 100644 > --- a/src/Utils.js > +++ b/src/Utils.js > @@ -100,6 +100,8 @@ utilities: { > return value; > }, > > + renderEnabledIcon: enabled => ``, > + i know i'm a bit late to the party, but couldn't we simply show nothing when a repo is not enabled? it's greyed-out anyway (though i'm not opposed to using the 'minus' icon here either)