After deletion of the first "connection" of my integration, I can't add a new one anymore

[apupier]

delete first connection, only "Set up this step" is provided

[gashcrumb]

So when you delete the first or last connection you're basically in a mode where you're selecting it's replacement, i.e. the first page in the process of picking the connection.

I think once we start persisting the integration to the backend we can probably relax this behavior a bit. But then I guess the question is, if the user deletes a connection in the editor, what should the main area of the page be showing after that? And of course, we have the trash icon there all the time, so I think in theory you could be in the middle of configuring a filter step or the data mapper etc.

@syndesisio/design-ux thoughts?

[dongniwang]

Hmm...so this is actually a complicated issue.

Let's say you have a filter step in between you two connections, if you delete the first connection, is that mean the filter step would have errors? This also applies to deleting other connections.

The other thing is, when to actually show the delete option (the trash can icon)? Maybe after you have a step/action configured in between two connections, you're no longer able to delete the connection?

[kcbabo]

At one point, I think we were leaning toward a very strict behavior here where once you set the start and finish connections they were set for good. Changing start or finish connections (or actions!) will blow up any type-aware step in the integration. Until we have a solid approach for dealing with that, I suggest we disallow delete of start/finish.

One option would be to select start/finish as an initial page, then move into the full editor.

Another thing to consider would be how to handle removal of step connections (a connection called between start/finish).

[gashcrumb]

Yeah, that's right I remember that. I think that's why we have the current behavior in fact, you can basically 'clear' the start or finish step, but then you have to configure it's replacement.

And true, deleting any additional connections that happen before or after a data mapping step may totally invalidate any mappings that may have been created already. So then what to do there?

[sjcox-rh]

I'd be okay with the suggestion of we disabling the ability to delete the start and finish connection for the time being until we figure out a better approach. However, if we disable that feature, I would feel better if the integration creation user flow had a cancel button in the action toolbar at the top. That way they can easily exit the integration creation flow and and create a new one.

Is that feasible or will it blow up the whole flow?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 8:50 AM, Stan Lewis notifications@github.com wrote:

Yeah, that's right I remember that. I think that's why we have the current behavior in fact, you can basically 'clear' the start or finish step, but then you have to configure it's replacement.

And true, deleting any additional connections that happen before or after a data mapping step may totally invalidate any mappings that may have been created already. So then what to do there?

— You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/689#issuecomment-318403694, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APgSBICg6FZh2yN2gUe2dHSNHQ7nxLAxks5sSLG5gaJpZM4Olbkc .

-- Sarah Jane Cox User Interaction Designer User Experience Design Team

Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com/about/whoisredhat/redhatstories.html?intcmp=70160000000TB9vAAG&

[kcbabo]

I think this plays into a longer game with iPaaS UX. We need to have the ability to visualize when data types don't match. When you first create a start/finish pair for Twitter/Salesforce, then you would immediately see an indicator that the data types don't match. There should be a quick link to create a data transformation to fix that problem. Same principle could be applied to removing a connection - now the expected data types don't match and it needs to be resolved. In the case of existing data mappings/filters/etc., it starts to get a bit ugly because you have to indicate that the existing steps need to be changed.

It's not an easy problem to solve and I think it's easier to address in the short term by restricting the user's ability to make destabilizing changes. I don't have an idea for a quick fix for the removing a step connection problem - that's just something that will require more insight on the user's part.

If others have better ideas I would love to hear them! :-)

[kcbabo]

Cancel makes sense to me. Not sure about the implications for auto-save on the backend though. Maybe not a big deal for new integrations, but existing integrations ...?

[gashcrumb]

Yeah, this may be something to re-visit once we get saving to the backend going. Until then I'd rather not muck with particular area :-)

[gashcrumb]

So I'd say for this issue, we should rename Next to Ok or Done when the context is the user has re-visited a step or action that's already been configured and is viewing/changing that step/action's configuration.

As far as getting into the state we have https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/696 to fix to prevent that.

[gashcrumb]

Ah, forgot about this issue -> https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/684 which covers actually renaming the button. So really this issue and #696 are duplicates, I think it'd be good to close this issue and track it under #696 so it's maybe more clear?

[sjcox-rh]

Ahh that's correct @gashcrumb. Forgot about the renaming buttons issue as well. Yeah I think it'd be best to close this one and just address all buttons in issue #684.

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Stan Lewis notifications@github.com wrote:

Ah, forgot about this issue -> #684 https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/684 which covers actually renaming the button. So really this issue and #696 https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/696 are duplicates, I think it'd be good to close this issue and track it under #696 https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/696 so it's maybe more clear?

— You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/syndesisio/syndesis-ui/issues/689#issuecomment-319111413, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/APgSBDtXvSlvCLRVDYe4cN8lHFimrTAOks5sTfetgaJpZM4Olbkc .

-- Sarah Jane Cox User Interaction Designer User Experience Design Team

Red Hat, Inc. http://www.redhat.com/about/whoisredhat/redhatstories.html?intcmp=70160000000TB9vAAG&