Routes redesign

[NikolaiYurchenko]

Routes stepper styles rework Assets Box rework to reuse in Routes modal Confirmation transaction modal redesign Tx modal look similar

[github-actions[bot]]

Please test this PR on: https://v2-staging-550-dot-fuji-306908.ey.r.appspot.com

[ferostabio]

@NikolaiYurchenko great work!

I was testing and I think we probably need to add something else to the confirmation modal @Markoyw , not sure since the user can see the info behind the modal, there it has no provider info whatsoever!

I was doing a single chain operation, on Arbitrum, and there are two vaults, with different sets of providers. I change between vaults and when I go to the confirmation screen, it appears as is nothing has changed

I took a small screenshot and ofc the safety ratings section with the providers is not visible, but what do you think?

[ferostabio]

@NikolaiYurchenko I would say continue on another PR based in this one and update the tx history. You can use the same modal, only for the time being at least maintain the step grouping

[Markoyw]

Hey @ferostabio

That's a valid point. I feel like if we were to any more information to this confirmation modal, it would be exactly like the previous screen with just the addition of the transaction route. Hence, it would be important for us to set the context/stage right at the beginning where the user chooses the vault.

[brozorec]

1. I manage a position on Optimism and I payback from Gnosis. The "from" titile should be Gnosis and not Optimism.

2. I'm not sure about the sign "->" below "Deposit to Aave V3 and Borrow from Aave V3". It's for the bridging, isn't "0.001 WETH / 1.2 USDC" better?

3. Based on the above, when we have double steps "deposit+borrow" or "payback+withdraw", there's a redundant provider name. So the wording be better "Deposit and borrow from Aave V3" and "Payback and withdraw from Aave V3".

[NikolaiYurchenko]

Thanks, will do. Only don't sure about second, for me it is pretty clear, Ill change and show how it will be

[ferostabio]

Thanks, will do. Only don't sure about second, for me it is pretty clear, Ill change and show how it will be

Agree with @brozorec on this one. Find the "->" confusing. I like how it looks, but I think it gives the impression of a swap: WETH is exchanged for USDC, and that's not what's happening.

[ferostabio]

Is there a reason for having this when there's a bridge? We're repeating the amount, we're literally doing ${singleAmount} -> ${singleAmount}. I would just show the amount we're bridging @brozorec