Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Added introduction to Unified Targets. #1725

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 9, 2019

Conversation

mikeller
Copy link
Member

@mikeller mikeller commented Oct 8, 2019

Not the prettiest thing I've ever done:

image

@mikeller mikeller added this to the 10.6.0 milestone Oct 8, 2019
McGiverGim
McGiverGim previously approved these changes Oct 8, 2019
Copy link
Member

@McGiverGim McGiverGim left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Right, the tooltip is not too flexible for this long texts. But is better than nothing ;)

@mikeller
Copy link
Member Author

mikeller commented Oct 8, 2019

@McGiverGim: One thing I think we should be doing for the next configurator release is to rework the flashing tab. Some ideas that I have are:

  • split the tab into multiple subtabs (like the PID Tuning tab) and use them as 'steps': 1. subtab: select target source, show information about different sources / channels, warnings, recovery information, load buttons; 2. subtab: display release notes for the selected / loaded target, configure flashing settings, flash button;
  • reorganise how targets are selected (1. subtab). Put selection of firmware channel (release / release candidate / development) after selection of the board. Reorganise board listings by manufacturer (full name), searching for manufacturer / board name;
  • (stretch goal) allow 'rich' information like manufacturer logo, board image, board specific release notes to be displayed.

So the tooltip is just fixing the lack of information to enable users to make an informed choice of what target to choose for now, but we should look into changing this into a better form after 10.6.0.

@Docteh
Copy link
Contributor

Docteh commented Oct 8, 2019

Do we want that tool tip to be wider? I saw the code that initializes jBox, and its odd enough to warrant a look just anyways.

jQuery(document).ready(function($) {
new jBox('Tooltip', {
attach: '.cf_tip',
trigger: 'mouseenter',
closeOnMouseleave: true,
closeOnClick: 'body',
delayOpen: 100,
delayClose: 100,
position: {
x: 'right',
y: 'center'
},
outside: 'x'
});
});

@mikeller
Copy link
Member Author

mikeller commented Oct 9, 2019

@Docteh: I didn't even look that far when I added the text. If there's an easy way to override width for this tooltip only then that sounds reasonable. If not I would not want to refactor this this late in 10.6.0.

@Docteh
Copy link
Contributor

Docteh commented Oct 9, 2019

I'll see if I can dig something acceptable up.
image

Need to flag this one tooltip differently, somehow.

@Docteh
Copy link
Contributor

Docteh commented Oct 9, 2019

@mikeller take a look, and judge.
image

diff for this
diff --git a/src/css/main.css b/src/css/main.css
index f7abdf22..3f60857f 100644
--- a/src/css/main.css
+++ b/src/css/main.css
@@ -1961,6 +1961,9 @@ button.active {
     max-width: 180px;
 }

+.jBox-Widetip {
+    max-width: 300px;
+}

 @media only screen and (max-width: 1055px) , only screen and (max-device-width: 1055px) {

diff --git a/src/js/gui.js b/src/js/gui.js
index b6cc0bba..3c1aeb4d 100644
--- a/src/js/gui.js
+++ b/src/js/gui.js
@@ -360,6 +360,21 @@ GUI_control.prototype.content_ready = function (callback) {
             outside: 'x'
         });

+        new jBox('Tooltip', {
+            theme: 'Widetip',
+            attach: '.cf_tip_wide',
+            trigger: 'mouseenter',
+            closeOnMouseleave: true,
+            closeOnClick: 'body',
+            delayOpen: 100,
+            delayClose: 100,
+            position: {
+                x: 'right',
+                y: 'center'
+            },
+            outside: 'x'
+        });
+
     });

     if (callback) callback();
diff --git a/src/tabs/firmware_flasher.html b/src/tabs/firmware_flasher.html
index d3e3d911..a675307d 100644
--- a/src/tabs/firmware_flasher.html
+++ b/src/tabs/firmware_flasher.html
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@
                         <td><select name="board">
                                 <option value="0" i18n="firmwareFlasherOptionLoading">Loading ...</option>
                         </select></td>
-                        <td><span class="description" i18n="firmwareFlasherOnlineSelectBoardDescription"></span><div class="hel
picon cf_tip" i18n_title="firmwareFlasherOnlineSelectBoardHint"/></td>
+                        <td><span class="description" i18n="firmwareFlasherOnlineSelectBoardDescription"></span><div clas
s="helpicon cf_tip_wide" i18n_title="firmwareFlasherOnlineSelectBoardHint"/></td>
                     </tr>
                     <tr>
                         <td><select name="firmware_version">

We should definitely do something about creating a jBox object on every tab change, later.

@mikeller
Copy link
Member Author

mikeller commented Oct 9, 2019

@Docteh: Thanks for the suggestion - makes it look a lot better, and it's additive, so it's low risk.

@McGiverGim
Copy link
Member

@McGiverGim: One thing I think we should be doing for the next configurator release is to rework the flashing tab.

Yes, we need to do something with it. With the new unified configs, divided by brand, etc. the actual selection has not too much sense. We can talk about it after the release.

@mikeller mikeller merged commit 8d40f35 into betaflight:master Oct 9, 2019
@mikeller mikeller deleted the add_unified_target_blurb branch October 9, 2019 12:37
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants