Merge lp://staging/~tpeeters/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/icon-disabled into lp://staging/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/staging

Proposed by Tim Peeters
Status: Rejected
Rejected by: Tim Peeters
Proposed branch: lp://staging/~tpeeters/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/icon-disabled
Merge into: lp://staging/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/staging
Prerequisite: lp://staging/~tpeeters/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/gallery-export-fix
Diff against target: 113 lines (+45/-3)
3 files modified
examples/ubuntu-ui-toolkit-gallery/Icons.qml (+30/-2)
src/Ubuntu/Components/1.3/Icon.qml (+1/-0)
tests/unit_x11/tst_components/tst_icon13.qml (+14/-1)
To merge this branch: bzr merge lp://staging/~tpeeters/ubuntu-ui-toolkit/icon-disabled
Reviewer Review Type Date Requested Status
Tim Peeters Disapprove
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot continuous-integration Needs Fixing
Cris Dywan Needs Fixing
Review via email: mp+289308@code.staging.launchpad.net

Commit message

Set the opacity of disabled icons to 0.3.

To post a comment you must log in.
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Approve (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
Cris Dywan (kalikiana) wrote :

Please add a unit test. It might be as simple as checking that the opacity is not 1 when enabled is false.

review: Needs Fixing
Revision history for this message
Tim Peeters (tpeeters) wrote :

We stopped adding 'silly' unit tests that check that components have the exact color that we define in the component or its style because they only cause overhead when changing a color, and don't catch any real bugs. I consider a unit test to check the opacity to be similarly useless.

Revision history for this message
Tim Peeters (tpeeters) wrote :

After discussing, we decided that I will add a test to verify that the opacity is reduced for a disabled icon.

1904. By Tim Peeters

sync trunk

1905. By Tim Peeters

add unit test

Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
ubuntu-sdk-build-bot (ubuntu-sdk-build-bot) wrote :
review: Needs Fixing (continuous-integration)
Revision history for this message
Tim Peeters (tpeeters) wrote :

Fixed with the new palette. See the discussion on https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-ux/+bug/1393485

For the header, the palette takes care of it. If other components need to update their opacity, probably they need to use the new palette properly, or set the opacity in the component itself while the Icon keeps its default opacity of 1.

review: Disapprove

Unmerged revisions

1905. By Tim Peeters

add unit test

1904. By Tim Peeters

sync trunk

1903. By Tim Peeters

set icon opacity to 0.3 when disabled

1902. By Tim Peeters

sync gallery-export-fix

Preview Diff

[H/L] Next/Prev Comment, [J/K] Next/Prev File, [N/P] Next/Prev Hunk
The diff is not available at this time. You can reload the page or download it.

Subscribers

People subscribed via source and target branches