User avatar link: fix spacing between badge and username
What does this MR do and why?
Fixes the spacing between the badge and the username of the
Screenshots or screen recordings
Before | After |
---|---|
![]() |
![]() |
How to set up and validate locally
- Visit a page there the user avatar link component is used, e.g. Epics: http://gdk.test:3000/groups/flightjs/-/epics/6
- Verify the spacing
MR acceptance checklist
This checklist encourages us to confirm any changes have been analyzed to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
-
I have evaluated the MR acceptance checklist for this MR.
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %15.10
added UX UX Paper Cuts maintenanceusability sectiondev severity4 typemaintenance + 1 deleted label
assigned to @seggenberger
Please wait for Reviewer Roulette to suggest a designer for UX review, and then assign them as Reviewer. This helps evenly distribute reviews across UX.
This message was generated automatically. You're welcome to improve it.
- A deleted user
added frontend label
2 Warnings ⚠ You've made some app changes, but didn't add any tests.
That's OK as long as you're refactoring existing code,
but please consider adding any of the maintenancepipelines, maintenancerefactor, maintenanceworkflow, documentation, QA labels.⚠ This merge request changed undocumented Vue components in
vue_shared/
. Please consider creating Stories for these components:app/assets/javascripts/vue_shared/components/user_avatar/user_avatar_link.vue
Reviewer roulette
Changes that require review have been detected!
Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:
Category Reviewer Maintainer frontend Paul Gascou-Vaillancourt (
@pgascouvaillancourt
) (UTC-5, 6 hours behind@seggenberger
)Coung Ngo (
@cngo
) (UTC+0, 1 hour behind@seggenberger
)UX Matthew Nearents (
@mnearents
) (UTC-8, 9 hours behind@seggenberger
)Maintainer review is optional for UX To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.
To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.
Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.
If needed, you can retry the
🔁 danger-review
job that generated this comment.Generated by
🚫 Dangerrequested review from @leetickett-gitlab
requested review from @mnearents
- Resolved by Jannik Lehmann
Hey
👋 @mnearents can you have a look at the change from a UX perspective?
@leetickett-gitlab can you have a look at the frontend change?
TY!
Bundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits e34cb724 and f25b5b95
✨ Special assetsEntrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 3.5 MB 3.5 MB - -0.0 % mainChunk 2 MB 2 MB - -0.0 %
Note: We do not have exact data for e34cb724. So we have used data from: e49c3718.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun thebundle-size-review
job
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.Please look at the full report for more details
Read more about how this report works.
Generated by
🚫 DangerAllure report
allure-report-publisher
generated test report!e2e-review-qa:
❗ test report for f25b5b95expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Create | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 29 | ✅ | | Plan | 49 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 50 | ✅ | | Manage | 34 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 37 | ❗ | | Govern | 27 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 32 | ❗ | | Verify | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | ❗ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Framework sanity | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 163 | 0 | 12 | 7 | 175 | ❗ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
requested review from @jannik_lehmann and removed review request for @leetickett-gitlab
👋 @leetickett-gitlab
, thanks for approving this merge request.This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, a new pipeline will be started shortly.
For more info, please refer to the following links:
added pipeline:mr-approved label
- Resolved by Jannik Lehmann
Changes LGTM!
Happy to approve this, and merge as soon as UX review has passed.
removed review request for @jannik_lehmann
removed review request for @mnearents
requested review from @jannik_lehmann
enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for e14c0130 succeeds
mentioned in commit 1711225b
added workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label
added releasedcandidate label
added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label
mentioned in merge request kubitus-project/kubitus-installer!1990 (merged)