pierrejeambrun commented on code in PR #44074:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/44074#discussion_r1846293564
##########
airflow/ui/package.json:
##########
@@ -17,18 +17,20 @@
},
"dependencies": {
"@chakra-ui/anatomy": "^2.2.2",
- "@chakra-ui/react": "^3.0.2",
+ "@chakra-ui/react": "^3.1.1",
"@codemirror/lang-json": "^6.0.1",
"@emotion/react": "^11.13.3",
"@tanstack/react-query": "^5.52.1",
"@tanstack/react-table": "^8.20.1",
- "@uiw/react-codemirror": "^4.23.5",
"@uiw/codemirror-themes-all": "^4.23.5",
+ "@uiw/react-codemirror": "^4.23.5",
"axios": "^1.7.7",
"chakra-react-select": "6.0.0-next.2",
+ "chart.js": "^4.4.6",
Review Comment:
If chart.js has everything that we need in terms of variety of charts and
customization option, indeed I think that would be simpler to use. 👍.
> Just curious with chartjs since legacy UI used echarts for many charts. On
first look the chartjs API looks similar to echarts. Were there any issues with
echarts that led to this decision?
I don't think so, it's just that `chart.js` has really good defaults and is
really easy to use in comparison, maybe this is what led Brent to try `chart.js`
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
