-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
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
Select — Add theme.select.clear.container.hover
#7397
Conversation
</Box> | ||
{({ hover }) => ( | ||
<Box | ||
{...theme.select.clear.container} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Won't this accidentally put a hover=[object, object]
on the Box?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
What does this PR do?
Adds ability for caller to define hover styling for Clear selection container.
Adds
plain
to Button to maintain previous "plain" functionality of the Button once we switch into the function notation.Where should the reviewer start?
src/js/components/Select/SelectContainer.js
What testing has been done on this PR?
Local in storybook and test added:
Screen.Recording.2024-10-23.at.3.43.38.PM.mov
How should this be manually tested?
Do Jest tests follow these best practices?
screen
is used for querying.asFragment()
is used for snapshot testing.Any background context you want to provide?
What are the relevant issues?
Closes #7342
Screenshots (if appropriate)
Do the grommet docs need to be updated?
Yes.
Should this PR be mentioned in the release notes?
Yes.
Is this change backwards compatible or is it a breaking change?
Backwards compatible.