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

[dex integration] Define strict layout breakpoints. #3309

Closed
amass01 opened this issue Mar 14, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3525
Closed

[dex integration] Define strict layout breakpoints. #3309

amass01 opened this issue Mar 14, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #3525

Comments

@amass01
Copy link
Member

amass01 commented Mar 14, 2021

As part of integrating dcrdex into decrediton we will need to match both gui's layout breakpoints.

Currently on the dex side we are using bootstrap's famous breakpoints - as mentioned on decred/dcrdex#997 (comment).
I found out that we use way too many layout breakpoints which might it make harder to integrate dex's gui in decrediton:

  • 1919
  • 1680<x<1919
  • 1440<x<1679
  • 1679
  • 1539
  • 1180
  • 1179
  • 1140
  • 1106
  • 978
  • 955
  • 916
  • 890
  • 800
  • 768
  • 765
  • 746
  • 710
  • 676
  • 670
  • 600
  • 588
  • 541
  • 540
  • 511
  • 500
  • 430
  • 420 :)
  • 409
  • 375
  • 299

Many of these are used 1-2 times and very close to other breakpoints so we have to improve these and define stricter set of breakpoints and ensure we use the same values all over the place.

@amass01 amass01 changed the title Define strict layout breakpoints as theme variables. [dex integration] Define strict layout breakpoints. Mar 14, 2021
@bgptr
Copy link
Collaborator

bgptr commented Jun 29, 2021

on this

@amass01
Copy link
Member Author

amass01 commented Jun 29, 2021

thanks @bgptr 💪🏽
it would be great, if we follow pi-ui & pigui breakpoints here, as we use it as our ui components lib.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants