Patternfly upgraded to v3.9.0

[skateman]

Now we're back with the proper gem version!
@himdel @epwinchell please review

[epwinchell]

Looks good

[epwinchell]

@miq-bot add_label ui

[himdel]

@skateman seems like there was a change in patternfly where selectpicker doesn't set bs-select-hidden on the original select => failing tests ;)

The vmdb failure looks rather unrelated otoh..

[himdel]

I'm looking at the test failures but...

---

EDIT:

The bower resolutions problem - hoping to fix that by something like bower/bower#2345 (but not sure if bower is still alive enough for this to get in..)

The bs-select-hidden test fail is because previously, bootstrap-select would hide the select and add its own div right after, whereas now, it puts the select inside its own div, making it hidden by .boostrap-select > select instead of .bs-select-hidden...

[skateman]

😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢 😢
@epwinchell?

[himdel]

Updated the tests to reflect the new selectpicker structure (and cleaned up those elem[0][2] in favor of jquery selectors and descriptive variables).

The toolbar is still broken though..

[himdel]

.. to track the problems ..

• failing tests caused by different selectpicker structure
• view toolbar not being positioned to the right
• missing margin after separator (also in master, fixed by Replace ruby generated toolbar with angular's #9753)
• uneven icon widths in toolbar dropdown causing text not to be aligned (also in master)
• download_choice having moved to the right (eg /service/explorer) - seems like the logic to move right should only apply to buttons with id =~ /^view_/ - (should be fixed in ui-components 0.0.6)
• toolbar too tall (fixed in cb71542)
• active menu item has a top border on hover (patternfly bug - fixed in the next release)

[skateman]

Let's wait for the angular toolbar to be merged, then we should upgrade directly to 3.9.0. @himdel @epwinchell ?

[epwinchell]

@skateman I totally agree.

[himdel]

Sure, no rush :) might be easier to fix the view toolbar after.

[miq-bot]

<pr_mergeability_checker />This pull request is not mergeable. Please rebase and repush.

[himdel]

@skateman you can replace that last commit by an update of manageiq-ui-components to 0.0.6.

[skateman]

@himdel yup, and also the pf version to 3.9.0 :)

[himdel]

Found one more issue (maybe pf-3.9?) .. hovering over the active menu item (secondary or tertiary) shows a black top border

(Added to the list)

[skateman]

This also happens on the patternfly 3.9.0 test pages, cc @jeff-phillips-18 patternfly/patternfly#442

[skateman]

patternfly/patternfly#442 (comment)

[himdel]

@skateman nice, that's probably everything then..

Should I merge, or do we wait for 3.10 (2 days I guess?)?

EDIT: guessing we don't want to wait, it's a minor issue

[skateman]

@epwinchell can you also check this? LGTM

[skateman]

@epwinchell @himdel pin/unpin buttons fixed

[skateman]

@miq-bot remove_label wip

[serenamarie125]

FYI, we want the pin icon to be used. Currently PatternFly has the arrows rather than the pin - so we should change that once the upgrade is complete

[jeff-phillips-18]

To change to pins for the collapse button in the header you can override with:

.secondary-collapse-toggle-pf {
&:before {
content: '\f08d';
}
&.collapsed {
&:before {
-ms-transform: rotate(45deg);
-webkit-transform: rotate(45deg);
transform: rotate(45deg);
content: '\f08d';
display: inline-block;
}
}
}

[miq-bot]

Checked commits skateman/manageiq@ad4633a~...b82024c with ruby 2.2.5, rubocop 0.37.2, and haml-lint 0.16.1
3 files checked, 2 offenses detected

app/views/layouts/_content.html.haml

• ⚠️ - Line 18 - Line is too long. [161/160]
• ⚠️ - Line 3 - Line is too long. [161/160]

[jeff-phillips-18]

👍

[himdel]

Not seeing any more UI breakage, merging..

@skateman We should however upgrade to 3.10 soon because of that active menu item bug :)

[himdel]

@jeff-phillips-18 @serenamarie125 any idea when that pin change will get into patternfly?

[serenamarie125]

@himdel I will talk to Leslie this week. There was some reluctance to taking this, but based on the user feedback that I've been getting from CloudForms customers, I'm still suggesting we go with it. I'll get back to you