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

refactor: max width layout #4500

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

refactor: max width layout #4500

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

emilyjablonski
Copy link
Collaborator

@emilyjablonski emilyjablonski commented Dec 4, 2024

Description

A refactor based on Detroit work. We don't currently have a layout component unrelated to markdown content that sets up default page margin and padding. This PR adds that generic layout using Seeds tokens.

No related issue.

How Can This Be Tested/Reviewed?

In the places where we are using MarkdownSection where we aren't using markdown in the content, I transition to the MaxWidthLayout component.

You can compare an invalid link like https://bloom.exygy.dev/bonk to this PR's preview to see a place where the new layout is being used.

Author Checklist:

  • Added QA notes to the issue with applicable URLs
  • Reviewed in a desktop view
  • Reviewed in a mobile view
  • Reviewed considering accessibility
  • Added tests covering the changes
  • Made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • Ran yarn generate:client and/or created a migration when required

Review Process:

  • Read and understand the issue
  • Ensure the author has added QA notes
  • Review the code itself from a style point of view
  • Pull the changes down locally and test that the acceptance criteria is met
  • Either (1) explicitly ask a clarifying question, (2) request changes, or (3) approve the PR, even if there are very small remaining changes, if you don't need to re-review after the updates

@@ -20,24 +19,21 @@ const ErrorPage = () => {
}, [profile])

return (
<Layout>
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

When this page was rendering (when the listing call fails on the listing view page) the header and footer were actually rendering twice.

Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 4, 2024

Deploy Preview for partners-bloom-dev ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit a40f5bc
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/partners-bloom-dev/deploys/67522e3d429b8b000833b0b1
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-4500--partners-bloom-dev.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 4, 2024

Deploy Preview for bloom-exygy-dev ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit a40f5bc
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/bloom-exygy-dev/deploys/67522e3d6948d60008e92403
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-4500--bloom-exygy-dev.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

@emilyjablonski emilyjablonski added the 1 review needed Requires 1 more review before ready to merge label Dec 4, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@mcgarrye mcgarrye left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Couldn't find any difference!!!

@mcgarrye mcgarrye added ready to merge Should be applied when a PR has been reviewed and approved and removed 1 review needed Requires 1 more review before ready to merge labels Dec 5, 2024
@ColinBuyck
Copy link
Collaborator

Is this good to merge @emilyjablonski?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready to merge Should be applied when a PR has been reviewed and approved
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants