Update table header
What does this MR do and why?
- Uses
$gray-10
for repo files header background color - Removes double border
Screenshots or screen recordings
Before | After |
---|---|
![]() |
![]() |
How to set up and validate locally
Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.
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 %15.11
added UX UX Paper Cuts frontend maintenanceusability typemaintenance labels
assigned to @annabeldunstone
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.
- Resolved by Tristan Read
1 Warning ⚠ 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.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 Ross Byrne (
@robyrne
) (UTC+0, same timezone as@annabeldunstone
)Tristan Read (
@tristan.read
) (UTC+13, 13 hours ahead of@annabeldunstone
)UX Philip Joyce (
@philipjoyce
) (UTC+0, same timezone as@annabeldunstone
)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
🚫 Danger
Bundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits ac8bd001 and d641e439
✨ Special assetsEntrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 3.55 MB 3.55 MB - 0.0 % mainChunk 2.04 MB 2.04 MB - 0.0 %
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 d641e439expand test summary
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Create | 28 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 29 | ✅ | | Plan | 49 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 50 | ✅ | | Manage | 33 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 37 | ❌ | | Govern | 27 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 32 | ❗ | | Verify | 12 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | ❗ | | Monitor | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Framework sanity | 9 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | | Package | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 162 | 1 | 12 | 7 | 175 | ❌ | +------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
- Resolved by Tristan Read
@seggenberger What do you think about this proposal? Not sure if the darker background is too distracting
🤔 Maybe the background should be white. Or the border could be removed. Or no change at all.@aregnery Do you have any thoughts? I don't think
wells
are documented yet
requested review from @seggenberger and @aregnery
added 197 commits
-
f6e174d7...d30f1685 - 196 commits from branch
master
- 67083f34 - Update table header
-
f6e174d7...d30f1685 - 196 commits from branch
requested review from @gdoyle and removed review request for @aregnery and @seggenberger
👋 @gdoyle
, 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
removed review request for @gdoyle
requested review from @robyrne
changed milestone to %15.10
added 41 commits
-
67083f34...1dc12c39 - 40 commits from branch
master
- d641e439 - Update table header
-
67083f34...1dc12c39 - 40 commits from branch
requested review from @tristan.read and removed review request for @robyrne
Thanks for this @annabeldunstone. No suggestions, happy to approve
🎉 . I'll set MWPSenabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for a2e05451 succeeds
mentioned in commit 91072bc1
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 workflowpost-deploy-db-staging label and removed workflowproduction label
added releasedcandidate label
added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label
mentioned in merge request kubitus-project/kubitus-installer!1990 (merged)