Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

ENT-11202, ENT-11335, ENT-11305: TOC bug-fixes #3220

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 20, 2024

Conversation

mineralsfree
Copy link
Contributor

@mineralsfree mineralsfree commented Feb 20, 2024

Improvements:

  1. Id generation for section headers (copied hugo behaviour of resolving same ids: id, id-1, id-2, id-3).
  2. Ignore h5, h6 when creating TOC.
  3. Set active link after page is loaded.
  4. TOC autoscroll calculates each TOC item height to move the container.

Ticket: ENT-11202 ENT-11335 ENT-11305
Changelog: None
Signed-off-by: Mikita Pilinka [email protected]

Ticket: ENT-11202 ENT-11335 ENT-11305
Changelog: None
Signed-off-by: Mikita Pilinka <[email protected]>
@mineralsfree
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cf-bottom jenkins, please

Copy link
Member

@olehermanse olehermanse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested the preview, seems to work well

@olehermanse
Copy link
Member

@mineralsfree remember to bring this to 3.21 and Alvaldi.

Copy link
Contributor

@craigcomstock craigcomstock left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The changes look good to me but it seems like this could be split up into a few comments with explanations of what problem they fixed and how?

@olehermanse
Copy link
Member

The changes look good to me but it seems like this could be split up into a few comments with explanations of what problem they fixed and how?

@craigcomstock we discussed this in person; a bit hard to untangle, some of the changes probably won't work separately (and so it doesn't make so much sense to split into separate commits). We considered to merge all the tickets into one ticket, but I said it was okay to do it like this. Also, keeping it together will probably make it quite a bit easier when cherry-picking.

The commit message could use a bit more words though, for example a list of what issues were fixed, instead of relying only on the tickets.

@olehermanse olehermanse merged commit 00205b0 into cfengine:master Feb 20, 2024
2 checks passed
Copy link
Contributor

@aleksandrychev aleksandrychev left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

@mineralsfree
Copy link
Contributor Author

Cherry-picked in #3227

@mineralsfree
Copy link
Contributor Author

The changes look good to me but it seems like this could be split up into a few comments with explanations of what problem they fixed and how?

I've updated the PR description. Will make better commit messages next time

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants