Skip to content
Snippets Groups Projects

Remember user preference for showing labels on work item widgets

What does this MR do and why?

Remember what the user's preference was for showing or hiding labels on

  • Work item tree (children)
  • Work item Relationships (Linked items)
  • Work item links (Task list on an issue)

MR acceptance checklist

Please evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.

Screenshots or screen recordings

Area Before After
Task list on issue Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.41.38 Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.40.38
Work item "Child items" list Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.42.22 Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.38.46
Work item "Linked items" list Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.43.04 Screen_Recording_2024-08-23_at_17.39.41

How to set up and validate locally

  1. Check out this branch
  2. Visit an issue in the GDK that has tasks (or add tasks to an existing issue)
  3. Make sure that at least one of the tasks has a label applied to it
  4. On the issue page, in the "Child items" section turn off the "Show labels" preference
  5. The labels will stop showing
  6. Refresh the page. The labels will not show once the page loads, and the "Show labels" preference toggle will be in the off position.
  7. Toggle the "Show labels" setting back on and refresh the page
  8. You will see that the labels show again on page load.
  9. Ensure you are using the epic work items feature flag
  10. Navigate to or create an epic that has at least one child epic
  11. Make sure that at least one of the child epics has a label applied to it
  12. In the "Child items" of the epic that has at least one child item with a label on it, toggle off the "Show labels" preference
  13. The labels will stop showing on child items
  14. Refresh the page. The labels will not show once the page loads, and the "Show labels" preference toggle will be in the off position.
  15. Toggle the "Show labels" setting back on and refresh the page
  16. You will see that the labels show again on page load.
  17. Link an issue that has at least one label applied to it to the epic in the "Linked items" section
  18. Turn off the "Show labels" preference for the Linked items section
  19. Refresh the page. The labels will not show once the page loads, and the "Show labels" preference toggle will be in the off position.
  20. Toggle the "Show labels" setting back on and refresh the page
  21. You will see that the labels show again on page load.

Related to #478618 (closed), #469616 (closed)

Edited by Chad Lavimoniere

Merge request reports

Loading
Loading

Activity

Filter activity
  • Approvals
  • Assignees & reviewers
  • Comments (from bots)
  • Comments (from users)
  • Commits & branches
  • Edits
  • Labels
  • Lock status
  • Mentions
  • Merge request status
  • Tracking
  • Rajan Mistry approved this merge request

    approved this merge request

  • Rajan Mistry requested review from @tbulva and removed review request for @ramistry

    requested review from @tbulva and removed review request for @ramistry

  • Chad Lavimoniere added 605 commits

    added 605 commits

    Compare with previous version

  • Bundle size analysis [beta]

    This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits a3810e6c and 92e2f0fc

    :sparkles: Special assets

    Entrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent
    average 4.33 MB 4.33 MB - 0.0 %
    mainChunk 3.27 MB 3.27 MB - 0.0 %

    Note: We do not have exact data for a3810e6c. So we have used data from: 2bda758d.
    The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
    It might help to rerun the bundle-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 :no_entry_sign: Danger

  • E2E Test Result Summary

    allure-report-publisher generated test report!

    e2e-test-on-gdk: :white_check_mark: test report for 92e2f0fc

    expand test summary
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |                          suites summary                          |
    +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    |             | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
    +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    | Secure      | 3      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 3     | ✅     |
    | Plan        | 73     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 73    | ✅     |
    | Create      | 128    | 0      | 16      | 0     | 144   | ✅     |
    | Govern      | 71     | 0      | 0       | 0     | 71    | ✅     |
    | Verify      | 44     | 0      | 2       | 0     | 46    | ✅     |
    | Package     | 20     | 0      | 12      | 0     | 32    | ✅     |
    | Release     | 5      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 5     | ✅     |
    | Data Stores | 31     | 0      | 1       | 0     | 32    | ✅     |
    | Analytics   | 2      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 2     | ✅     |
    | Monitor     | 8      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 8     | ✅     |
    | Fulfillment | 2      | 0      | 0       | 0     | 2     | ✅     |
    | Manage      | 1      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 2     | ✅     |
    +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    | Total       | 388    | 0      | 32      | 0     | 420   | ✅     |
    +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

    e2e-test-on-omnibus: :white_check_mark: test report for 92e2f0fc

    expand test summary
    +-------------------------------------------------------------+
    |                       suites summary                        |
    +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    |        | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
    +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    | Create | 270    | 0      | 36      | 0     | 306   | ✅     |
    | Plan   | 82     | 0      | 9       | 0     | 91    | ✅     |
    +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
    | Total  | 352    | 0      | 45      | 0     | 397   | ✅     |
    +--------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
  • Tomas Bulva
  • Tomas Bulva removed review request for @tbulva

    removed review request for @tbulva

  • Chad Lavimoniere added 284 commits

    added 284 commits

    Compare with previous version

  • added 1 commit

    • a1cea341 - Incorporate feedback from tbulva

    Compare with previous version

  • Chad Lavimoniere requested review from @tbulva

    requested review from @tbulva

  • :tools: Generated by gitlab_quality-test_tooling.


    :snail: Slow tests detected in this merge request. These slow tests might be related to this merge request's changes.

    Click to expand
    Job File Name Duration Expected duration
    #7699707378 ee/spec/features/groups/work_items/work_item_spec.rb#L46 Work item for signed in user for epic work items on the work item route behaves like work items rolled up dates when feature flag is enabled when using inheritable dates when removing all children rolled up child dates 51.52 s < 50.13 s
    #7730705117 ee/spec/features/groups/work_items/work_item_spec.rb#L46 Work item for signed in user for epic work items on the work item route behaves like work items rolled up dates when feature flag is enabled when using inheritable dates when removing all children rolled up child dates 53.58 s < 50.13 s
  • A deleted user added rspec:slow test detected label
  • Tomas Bulva removed review request for @tbulva

    removed review request for @tbulva

  • added 1 commit

    Compare with previous version

  • Chad Lavimoniere requested review from @tbulva

    requested review from @tbulva

  • Tomas Bulva approved this merge request

    approved this merge request

  • Before you set this MR to auto-merge

    This merge request will progress on pipeline tiers until it reaches the last tier: pipelinetier-3. We will trigger a new pipeline for each transition to a higher tier.

    Before you set this MR to auto-merge, please check the following:

    • You are the last maintainer of this merge request
    • The latest pipeline for this merge request is pipelinetier-3 (You can find which tier it is in the pipeline name)
    • This pipeline is recent enough (created in the last 8 hours)

    If all the criteria above apply, please set auto-merge for this merge request.

    See pipeline tiers and merging a merge request for more details.

  • Tomas Bulva removed review request for @tbulva

    removed review request for @tbulva

  • Tomas Bulva resolved all threads

    resolved all threads

  • Tomas Bulva enabled automatic add to merge train when checks pass

    enabled automatic add to merge train when checks pass

  • Tomas Bulva added this merge request to the merge train at position 2

    added this merge request to the merge train at position 2

  • merged

  • Tomas Bulva mentioned in commit 4b6003bf

    mentioned in commit 4b6003bf

  • added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label

  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Loading
  • Please register or sign in to reply
    Loading