Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
Thus said Joe Mistachkin on Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:43:15 -0700: Works great. I made a couple style tweaks, including adding some CSS and moving the new elements out one level. I'm not sure if my CSS is the best choice, please feel free to enhance the styling. Looks fine here. I sometimes find it hard to find the letter that was added to the string when checking a new capability and end up toggling the checkbox multiple times to watch for which new letter is being inserted in the middle of the string of letters. Would it be better to just add each new capability letter to the end of the current string? Or perhaps instead each Capability should have it's letter next to it? (s) Setup(u) Reader (r) Read Ticket (a) Admin(v) Developer(n) New Tickets (d) Delete (g) Clone(c) Append To Ticket (e) Email(j) Read Wiki(w) Write Tickets Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000542ac246 ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
The first impl used whatever order the checkboxes are in, but that was even less readable. One simple solution, i think, would be to keep the sorting but underline the most recently selected letter. Will try that when i get home. - stephan Sent from a mobile device, possibly from bed. Please excuse brevity and typos. On Sep 30, 2014 4:46 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: Thus said Joe Mistachkin on Sat, 27 Sep 2014 14:43:15 -0700: Works great. I made a couple style tweaks, including adding some CSS and moving the new elements out one level. I'm not sure if my CSS is the best choice, please feel free to enhance the styling. Looks fine here. I sometimes find it hard to find the letter that was added to the string when checking a new capability and end up toggling the checkbox multiple times to watch for which new letter is being inserted in the middle of the string of letters. Would it be better to just add each new capability letter to the end of the current string? Or perhaps instead each Capability should have it's letter next to it? (s) Setup(u) Reader (r) Read Ticket (a) Admin(v) Developer(n) New Tickets (d) Delete (g) Clone(c) Append To Ticket (e) Email(j) Read Wiki(w) Write Tickets Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000542ac246 ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:24 PM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Or perhaps instead each Capability should have it's letter next to it? (s) Setup(u) Reader (r) Read Ticket (a) Admin(v) Developer(n) New Tickets (d) Delete (g) Clone(c) Append To Ticket (e) Email(j) Read Wiki(w) Write Tickets That's certainly doable with or without the permissions string update. Looking into it now. Here's a screenshot showing a partial implementation, with a couple different placement options. i'm not happy with any of them :/. http://fossil.wanderinghorse.net/tmp/permissions-rendering-ideas.png -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
Thus said Stephan Beal on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 17:32:06 +0200: Here's a screenshot showing a partial implementation, with a couple different placement options. i'm not happy with any of them :/. I actually did try to update it myself last night but had alignment issues due to the font on the (s) letter not being a fixed font. http://fossil.wanderinghorse.net/tmp/permissions-rendering-ideas.png I see that you tried left of word, right of word, and before the checkbox. The left of word options looks much better than it did for me (all aligned) and is the one that I think works best. Hard to say if any of them is an improvement. Maybe this should be left alone for now... Thanks for considering it. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000542ad26a ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org wrote: I actually did try to update it myself last night but had alignment issues due to the font on the (s) letter not being a fixed font. i didn't even consider the font width - excellent point. http://fossil.wanderinghorse.net/tmp/permissions-rendering-ideas.png I see that you tried left of word, right of word, and before the checkbox. The left of word options looks much better than it did for me (all aligned) and is the one that I think works best. Hard to say if any of them is an improvement. Agreed, and i'm also undecided. Maybe this should be left alone for now... Thanks for considering it. problem == null. Suggestions are welcomed - i like the idea, i just don't like how it comes out looking ;). -- - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/ http://gplus.to/sgbeal Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Sep 30, 2014 9:57 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Andy Bradford amb-fos...@bradfords.org
wrote:
I actually did try to update it myself last night but had alignment
issues due to the font on the (s) letter not being a fixed font.
i didn't even consider the font width - excellent point.
{snipped}
Sorry for opening this huge can of worms! :)
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com
wrote:
On Sep 30, 2014 9:57 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
i didn't even consider the font width - excellent point.
{snipped}
Sorry for opening this huge can of worms! :)
i lay the blame squarely on Andy B. for that one ;). i'm really pleased
with your initial change from colored dots to colored letters - that change
was a long time coming, but probably just never happened because user
administration happens so seldom. Every time i had to do it, though, i had
to zoom the page in to 200% to differentiate the blue dots from the black
ones.
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
Thus said Scott Robison on Tue, 30 Sep 2014 10:04:29 -0600: Sorry for opening this huge can of worms! :) Haha, don't sweat it. I've actually wished for some improvements to the permission checkbox page for a while. I've always found it annoying that the letters are not displayed when selecting the checkbox and usually I have to have 2 tabs open, one that displays the Notes where the letters are actually next to capabilities and then the edit page. e.g. /setup_ulist actually does have all the permission flag letters next to the names, so I'm accustomed to opening a tab with /setup_ulist and then another tab for /setup_uedit when updating a user. I think the subscript letters are a big improvement over the dots (which I could never see very well). The Javascript option is also much better because at least I have a way of seeing the letter without referring to /setup_ulist Notes. Thanks, Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 4000542adc14 ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
That is close to what i do for initial prototypes - develop in the chrome dev tools console, injecting the code into the page, but at some point it has to get integrated. (sent from a mobile device, possibly from bed - please excuse brevity, typos, and top-posting) - stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net On Sep 30, 2014 6:38 PM, Ron W ronw.m...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Sep 30, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Testing/tweaking JS code generated from C code, requiring a recompile and server process restart after each change, gets really tedious really quickly, so i'd like to keep the implementation as trivial as possible ;). Maybe could have the generated Javascript call a function defined in a file loaded by a script tag. Then, in theory, you could just edit the included file and not have to rebuild and restart the server until the final version of the JS code was ready. ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Scott Robison sc...@casaderobison.com wrote: On Sep 28, 2014 12:49 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Sidenote: i'm curious why most people prefer postscript addition, when prefix is never slower and sometimes faster. (Not that it matters one iota for a case like this, it just seems to be very deeply embedded in most people i know.) I think most people (I am not most people in this case) prefer / use postfix increment decrement because it is what they learned first and how most examples seem to be written. I use it because when I first learned C, I used the post-increment/decrement side effect much more often than the pre-increment/decrement side effect. In recent years, though, I have slowly acceded to the guidelines discouraging use of side effects, but I'm still in the habit of using postfix ++ and -- ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Sat, Sep 27, 2014 at 11:43 PM, Joe Mistachkin sql...@mistachkin.com
wrote:
Works great. I made a couple style tweaks, including adding some CSS and
moving the new elements out one level. I'm not sure if my CSS is the best
choice, please feel free to enhance the styling.
Looks good to me, but bit of trivia here:
@ for(var i = 0; i inputs.length; i++){
@ var e = inputs[i];
In JS there are only 2 scopes: global and local function scope, so that
(var e) behaves as if it's declared outside of the for loop, whether or not
it really is. Kinda silly, i know.
Sidenote: i'm curious why most people prefer postscript addition, when
prefix is never slower and sometimes faster. (Not that it matters one
iota for a case like this, it just seems to be very deeply embedded in most
people i know.)
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote:
In JS there are only 2 scopes: global and local function scope, so that
(var e) behaves as if it's declared outside of the for loop, whether or not
it really is. Kinda silly, i know.
Had to go clarify that for my own sake:
http://dailyjs.com/2012/07/23/js101-scope/
See the section entitled no block scope.
Alternately, if the email client doesn't mangle it, here it is pasted in:
No Block Scope
Variables and functions are visible within the current function, regardless
of blocks. This is amazingly confusing because it prevents us from using
control structures to declare functions and variables in a dynamic way.
Defining variables in blocks may confuse programmers who work with other
languages:
function example() {
// Do not do this
for (var i = 0; i 3; i++) {
var a = 1;
// Do stuff with `a`
}}
Since there is no block scope, the previous example should be written like
this:
function example() {
var i, a;
for (i = 0; i 3; i++) {
a = 1;
// Do stuff with `a`
}}
That said: JS behaves the same either way, so it's a question of style, not
of correctness. i.e. don't bother going back and changing it unless this
detail keeps you up at night ;).
--
- stephan beal
http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
http://gplus.to/sgbeal
Freedom is sloppy. But since tyranny's the only guaranteed byproduct of
those who insist on a perfect world, freedom will have to do. -- Bigby Wolf
___
fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org
http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
On Sep 28, 2014 12:49 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Sidenote: i'm curious why most people prefer postscript addition, when prefix is never slower and sometimes faster. (Not that it matters one iota for a case like this, it just seems to be very deeply embedded in most people i know.) I think most people (I am not most people in this case) prefer / use postfix increment decrement because it is what they learned first and how most examples seem to be written. I prefer to use prefix operators (barring the need for postfix side effects) just because they read more naturally in my native language. I think it makes more sense when thinking increment i to see ++i. The fact that it is potentially more efficient (though probably not in practice) is just a bonus. Now if only I could get everyone on board with making $ for currency a postfix operator (because 1$ makes more sense than $1). :) ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
Scott Robison wrote: --===0702352335== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d044286d854da5a05042007d5 --f46d044286d854da5a05042007d5 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Sep 28, 2014 12:49 AM, Stephan Beal sgb...@googlemail.com wrote: Sidenote: i'm curious why most people prefer postscript addition, when prefix is never slower and sometimes faster. (Not that it matters one iota for a case like this, it just seems to be very deeply embedded in most people i know.) I think most people (I am not most people in this case) prefer / use postfix increment decrement because it is what they learned first and how most examples seem to be written. I prefer to use prefix operators (barring the need for postfix side effects) just because they read more naturally in my native language. I think it makes more sense when thinking increment i to see ++i. The fact that it is potentially more efficient (though probably not in practice) is just a bonus. I do it because it's what's most commonly used in C. For C, any considerations of efficiency are likely to be negligible, but if you're writing in C++, the cost of constructing and destructing a user-defined object *may* mean that using the prefix form has a non-negligible efficiency advantage over the postfix form. So, for C++, it may make sense to get into to habit of using the prefix form, unless there is a specific reason for using the postfix form. -- Will ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
Re: [fossil-users] Proposed improvement to inheritedprivilegessubscripts.
Stephan Beal wrote: Please try this out: http://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/timeline?r=inherit-priv-mark-sub Works great. I made a couple style tweaks, including adding some CSS and moving the new elements out one level. I'm not sure if my CSS is the best choice, please feel free to enhance the styling. -- Joe Mistachkin ___ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
