search

sourcegraph / sourcegraph-public-snapshot

Code AI platform with Code Search & Cody
https://sourcegraph.com
Other
10.11k stars 1.29k forks source link

[DESIGN] Rethink the Close/Removal flow for batch change #38713

Open danielmarquespt opened 2 years ago

danielmarquespt commented 2 years ago

The flow to remove draft batch changes from the list is too complex without proper guidance. This needs to be easier as its a useful and standard feature of any list

The flow right now: Image

Related Threads: https://sourcegraph.slack.com/archives/CMMTWQQ49/p1657673534806369 https://sourcegraph.slack.com/archives/C03CSAER9LK/p1658783480438529

Proposed solutions

While some executions are actual draft (I want to get back to it later), some are not valuable to persist (I played with it, and don't need it anymore). It'd probably make sense to have a discard button easily accessible from the batch change execution page, and maybe from the batch changes list.

Design Pending

courier-new commented 2 years ago

This is a symptom of the server-side workflow being completely separated from the existing src-cli batch change stuff. The "right" solution is unifying the two workflows, but as a stop-gap I wonder if we could just add "Close" to the actions menu we show from server-side screens when there's more than one action you can take on that screen:

Image

chrispine commented 2 years ago

Assuming this is the design (not implementation) represented in this issue, I don't have a strong sense of the relative priority of this compared to our other design tasks

danielmarquespt commented 2 years ago

Assuming this is the design (not implementation) represented in this issue, I don't have a strong sense of the relative priority of this compared to our other design tasks

Yes, this is just design, because I think it required and deeper re-think of the flow. Given our priorities right now, I think this is blacklog, but we can discuss in Sprint Planning

LawnGnome commented 2 years ago

I guess the question is whether we want to add the Close action as a temporary stopgap, or whether that's not going to move the needle enough to worth the effort. (My estimate on that is 0.5d, but low confidence, as I have minimal knowledge of that component.)

courier-new commented 2 years ago

Update: we implemented the stop-gap as its own ticket: https://github.com/sourcegraph/sourcegraph/issues/39446. This ticket now exclusively pertains to the longterm better design for this.

I think it's worth backlogging this in favor of higher priority design work.

courier-new commented 2 years ago

Backlogging this for now. It isn't high priority in light of other strategic-ready design efforts.