The Resources(Nodes) item that is collapsible on the left hand side in that attached wireframes is a Panel Group in the Infrastructure Dashboard. The plan is to make Panel Groups expandable/collapsible with the UI improvements. There is nothing in Horizon's implementation that prevents the Panels under Resources(Nodes) to be in separate directories. Currently, each Panel in a Dashboard is in an separate directory in the Dashboard directory. As the potential number of panels in a Dashboard grows, I see no reason to not make a subdirectory for each panel group.
David > -----Original Message----- > From: Tzu-Mainn Chen [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Saturday, January 11, 2014 12:50 AM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: [openstack-dev] [Horizon][Tuskar] Tuskar-UI navigation > > Hey all, > > I have a question regarding the development of the tuskar-ui navigation. > > So, to give some background: we are currently working off the wireframes > that Jaromir Coufal has developed: > > http://people.redhat.com/~jcoufal/openstack/tripleo/2013-12-03_tripleo- > ui_02-resources.pdf > > In these wireframes, you can see a left-hand navigation for Resources (which > we have since renamed Nodes). This > left-hand navigation includes sub-navigation for Resources: Overview, > Resource Nodes, Unallocated, etc. > > It seems like the "Horizon way" to implement this would be to create a > 'nodes/' directory within our dashboard. > We would create a tabs.py with a Tab for Overview, Resource Nodes, > Unallocated, etc, and views.py would contain > a single TabbedTableView populated by our tabs. > > However, this prevents us from using left-handed navigation. As a result, > our nodes/ directory currently appears > as such: https://github.com/openstack/tuskar- > ui/tree/master/tuskar_ui/infrastructure/nodes > > 'overview', 'resource', and 'free' are subdirectories within nodes, and they > each define their own panel.py, > enabling them to appear in the left-handed navigation. > > This leads to the following questions: > > * Would our current workaround be acceptable? Or should we follow > Horizon precedent more closely? > * I understand that a more flexible navigation system is currently under > development > (https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/navigation- > enhancement) - would it be preferred that > we follow Horizon precedent until that navigation system is ready, rather > than use our own workarounds? > > Thanks in advance for any opinions! > > > Tzu-Mainn Chen > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
