ISISComputingGroup / IBEX

Top level repository for IBEX stories
5 stars 2 forks source link

GUI: Stack small groups on top of each other #3512

Closed Tom-Willemsen closed 2 years ago

Tom-Willemsen commented 6 years ago

As an instrument scientist on HRPD, I would like small groups to stack on top of each other vertically (if there is enough space). This would let me see more of my blocks simultaneously

Asked for by Dom Fortes (HRPD)

kjwoodsISIS commented 5 years ago

How about providing another option, namely to display blocks "ungrouped" (i.e. simply display them in alphabetical order (probably best), or in order of creation (I think this is less good))?

Alistair-McGann-Tessella commented 5 years ago

A LOQ instrument scientist has also requested this feature

ThomasLohnert commented 3 years ago

Heard someone else +1 this recently (I cannot remember who it was, sorry. probably SURF or POLREF)

kjwoodsISIS commented 3 years ago

Actually, SANDALS have asked for this too.

davidkeymer commented 3 years ago

Possibly have "collapsible" groups using the same mechanism as the main toolbar on the left of the GUI? Still showing the group name, then these "tiles"(?) could be rearranged to save dashboard space. When expanded, the groups would pop back to their original positions.

This is also used in the Beam Information panel on the Beam Status perspective. This may be more useful as the groups are collapsed vertically.

Adam-Szw commented 2 years ago

PRs: Ibex GUI: https://github.com/ISISComputingGroup/ibex_gui/pull/1396 Release Notes: https://github.com/ISISComputingGroup/IBEX/pull/7028

Features added:

I didn't add option suggested here because this is the same as just leaving all blocks without group which would place them in 'other' group.

rerpha commented 2 years ago

Just going to take myself off review as I didn't get round to finishing it yesterday, in case someone else picks it up

rerpha commented 2 years ago

Can we squish test this? if so, can one of you create a ticket for it pls? If not, we should add it to the manual tests.

@SamJenkins1 @Adam-Szw