Added ionDragEnd output event to be emitted on leave for ion-range

[AmitMY]

Short description of what this resolves:

Currently, there is no way to know if ionic-range is being focused or not.

Changes proposed in this pull request:

• Add an output event called ionDragEnd to ion-range, that is being triggered when the range is being left (pointer up)
• <ion-range (ionDragEnd)="onDragEnd($event)"></ion-range>

Ionic Version: 2.2.0

Fixes: This feature request: #10760

[manucorporat]

Maybe ionDragEnd better?

[AmitMY]

@manucorporat Thanks, that is indeed a better name. Changed

[manucorporat]

@AmitMY thanks! btw I can change the commit title, but please review the commit message style next time you submit a PR.
https://github.com/driftyco/ionic/blob/master/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md#commit-message-format

[AmitMY]

@manucorporat My apologies. Definitely will do next time.
Is this PR in a ready-to-merge state, or is there anything missing?

[manucorporat]

@AmitMY you are going to kill me hahah
so I have been talking with the team, and we think we should use ionBlur and ionFocus just like we use with ion-input

Eventually we should implement this events in all the ionic inputs consistently: #8578

Can you modify the PR again using ionBlur? would you mind trying to implement ionFocus as well?

ionFocus = ionDragStart

We don't like ionDragEnd because it is not agnostic and there is not ionDrag event, but ionChange.

Thanks again for your time!

[AmitMY]

I'll be happy to change even 10 times if this gets merged :)

About dragStart - you supplied all of the methods:

pointerDown: this._pointerDown.bind(this),
pointerMove: this._pointerMove.bind(this),
pointerUp: this._pointerUp.bind(this),

Its just a matter of emitting blur and focus. Done

Any way this can be in 2.3 or no way?

Edit:
sorry. just now realised I ignored the commit style guide (again).

[manucorporat]

sure, I expect to merge this today if all the requested changes are added!!

[manucorporat]

let's move this at the bottom of the function just to make sure we don't break anything!

[AmitMY]

I think it would be more correct there, as if I put this at the end, the order of firing would be:
ionChange -> ionFocus -> ionChange x many -> ionBlur

Instead of:
ionFocus -> ionChange x (many+1) -> ionBlur

Still think I should change?

[manucorporat]

shit! you right

[manucorporat]

@AmitMY don't worry about the commit style guide in this PR!

[manucorporat]

@AmitMY merged! thanks a lot for the PR!