incubator-bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Olemis Lang <>
Subject Re: User comments on ticket modification UI
Date Wed, 06 Feb 2013 17:17:53 GMT
Hi !

On 2/6/13, Gary Martin <> wrote:
> On 31/01/13 22:00, Tom Kitchin wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I've been following along in the discussion and I've been encouraged to
>> weigh in, so I've just spent a bit of time playing with the ticket
>> layout,
>> and my thoughts are below.
>> My first thought is that the scroll spy doesn't really suit the layout,
>> as
>> has been suggested - on my laptop at least it takes up a considerable
>> amount of screen estate without providing much value - the ticket itself
>> simply isn't long enough to warrant it.  As has also already been noted,
>> the "Modify ticket" button also functions differently from the line of
>> similarly styled buttons next to it.  It might work better if the Modify
>> ticket button was visibly separated from the positional buttons, and
>> became
>> the Update/Submit/whatever button when in edit mode instead of having the
>> "Update (leave)" button above it.  This would cut back on the size of the
>> spy a bit without losing functionality.  The length of the change history
>> isn't a problem if the spy is kept this way, as well - collapsing it
>> strikes me as a bit clunky.
>> I think there's a strange overlap on changes to comments.  I agree that
>> any
>> change should allow for leaving a comment with it, but then we have a
>> section called "Change history" in the page but "Comments" in the spy,
>> and
>> the "Submit changes" button being used to submit a comment even if you're
>> not in edit mode.  We should encourage discussion of tickets where
>> relevant, so making commentary without change easy would be best, I
>> think.
>>   Perhaps just reducing the "Submit changes" text of the button under the
>> comments box to "Submit" would be enough of a change there?  I suspect
>> that
>> a comments box on a ticket with "Submit changes" under it would make me
>> nervous, while just "Submit" reads as submitting a comment when
>> commenting
>> and submitting changes when editing.  Similarly, the Comments navigation
>> button could read "History" instead, which I think also carries a dual
>> meaning which will make sense to people looking for past comments and
>> people looking for the change history.
>> I think accept/reassign/resolve should be buttons outside of edit mode,
>> and
>> should act immediately rather than need submitting.  If they're a set of
>> actual buttons their purpose and immediate effect is completely clear,
>> while embedding them in the Update button dropdown is confusing.  Unless
>> you check the dropdown, what does "Update (leave)" mean, anyway?
>> Tom
> Sorry I have taken so long to consider this. And thanks for the great
> feedback Tom!
> The accept/reassign/resolve actions still really require a submit
> action,

IMO «Update (accept)» is informative enough : Update the ticket,
assign and accept it . Workflow actions are specified in configuration
, so I guess action name should not be a major problem (CMIIW) .

If the issue is mainly about «Update (leave)» , which is actually odd
, we could just consider it a special case , and hide action name to
get just the «Update» label . Is that enough ?



View raw message