| Re: [hudson-dev] Solid backbround color? |
I tried to fix the footer section near the bottom of the browser window if the contents are shorter but I feel the responsive grid-based layout does not have good height control in a cross-browser way. I have tried a new CSS flexbox to implement it but some browser (I mean MSIE) totally ignored it. I also tried 'display: fixed' for the footer but it could move the footer out of the browser window if the contents got longer. I hope it could be easier if header-content-footer division is totally vertical and I will try in that way.
By the way, what is done with _javascript_ to make the search box? It looks it adds some spacing around the search box and it does not fit well in a grid. It might better not to use fixed grids to use more flexible layout in the header section, I think.
Hi Kaz,
That looks great. I'm in favor of removing the existing background images and go with solid color and keep the header and footer fixed, so content area can be scrolled. The over all theme in Hudson was Eclipse purple theme. Now it is changed. So you could use something like this theme
https://www.eclipse.org/artwork/
- Winston
While I am working on responsive layouts, a page header with an image background does not work well. If we choose a solid background color, what color code is appropriate for Hudson?
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 8:24 AM Kaz Nishimura <kazssym@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I did the most of grid rewrites in the main layout but it would be better to reorganize the header section if I continue the work so that we have a header across the entire browser window because grids cannot reorder items and merely constraints width ratios of them.
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 12:06 PM Kaz Nishimura <kazssym@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I was finally forced to use a flexbox <http://www.w3.org/TR/css-flexbox-1/> to display the footer at the bottom of the browser window if possible because height="100%" (or style="height: 100%") did not work for it. If the content is longer, the footer is placed at the end ordinarily even if a flexbox is used.Any older browsers that do not support flexbox will just display the footer in the middle of the window if the content is shorter than the window height. Internet Explorer 11 is claimed to support flexbox but strangely it worked as if it did not support it in my environment.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:15 PM Kaz Nishimura <kazssym@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
That's my homework. :)
Many tables are used for layouts and I must check the result of my change and correct broken layout each time. Now I wonder why 8em top margin was added to footer parts and worked properly in the original table-based layout.
2015年8月18日(火) 19:55 Duncan Mills <duncan.mills@xxxxxxxxxx>:
Nice!For everyone, here’s the contrast between this version and the default:Here’s the hudson-ci.org server on my phone - magnifying glass required!
And the new version - now much more readable:
Question Kaz - Can you get the search field to wrap down to the next screen?
Duncan
On 18 Aug 2015, at 08:31, Duncan Mills <duncan.mills@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Kaz, I see the improvement in font sizing when I run on my phone, but when I first tried this this morning I’m sure that the page also re-arranged itself with the sidebar moving up above the Jobs table - it may have been my imagination though?On 18 Aug 2015, at 04:08, Kaz Nishimura <kazssym@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Just FYI, as the first step, I added the viewport meta element to my installation of Hudson at <http://alfa.vx68k.org/hudson/>. The window content does no longer simply overflow from the right edge of the browser window (but still overflows on a narrow window) and is visible on mobile devices with readable font size by default.
Welcome back. Pure is a CSS-only framework that I think has basic components with maximal customizability. It is hosted on GitHub https://github.com/yahoo/pure and we can regenerate CSS files ourselves, but I feel pre-generated CSSs are enough to use with addition of several custom CSS rules. I have not tried it in Hudson yet but I will do it anyway soon.
Back from vacation now.
With the Eclipse CQ process there are two factors - one is the license and the second is the code provenance. Can it be determined exactly who wrote this code and who may have a stake in it. If a brand new library is asked for then the Eclipse legal folks will probably want to get in touch with the authors of the code to confirm all that stuff.
I’ll be happy to submit CQs once you’ve determined that a particular set of libraries is going to tick your boxes, we should probably try and get approval sooner rather than later :-)
Duncan
On 13 Aug 2015, at 17:03, Winston Prakash <winston.prakash@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Unfortunately I don't know the answer. Duncan does all the CQ process for Hudson third party libraries and Framework (I guess he is on vacation).
I did a search at Eclipse IPzilla for per-approved CQs for
- Twitter Bootstrap
- Zurb Foundation
- Yahoo PureCss
I found only approval for Twitter Bootstrap
<dfjgaiib..png>
That doesn't mean we can't get approval for other Frameworks. It will take a while though. So feel free to experiment with purecss.
- Winston
This is the license terms applied to Pure. Do you think it can be rejected?
Copyright 2014 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are met:
* Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution. * Neither the name of the Yahoo! Inc. nor the names of its contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from this software without specific prior written permission.THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL YAHOO! INC. BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
Normalize.css License
Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to the following conditions:
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT, TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN THE SOFTWARE.
When it comes to software License, Eclipse is very picky. Any library or framework we use in Hudson need to under go an approval process. Before we include any framework in the final release, a CQ (https://wiki.eclipse.org/Development_Resources/Contribution_Questionnaire) need to be filed and get approved.
- WInston
In addition to Foundation and Skeleton mentioned previously, I found another one, Pure <http://purecss.io/> today. It offers 1/5-based grid in addition to 1/24-based one, and it is quite small (17 KB minified compared to 120 KB of Bootstrap) while offering common components like tables, menus, buttons, etc. It looks quite young but it could be more widely used in the future as it is made by Yahoo. It does not use _javascript_ at all but it can be extended or combined with scripts, and It is licensed under the 3-clause BSD License instead of the MIT as the former ones. It is provided in several modules and we can use only the modules we need while we can still use all-in-one file (it is still 17 KB). I like its modular design and small footprint, so I will experiment a small number of page design with it.
I know about both Bootstrap and Foundation. I never used Skeleton. In another project, I started out with Foundation. It is an excellent framework. Eventually I switched to Bootstrap because of some issues in Foundation 5 and couldn't find documentation or forum support to resolve them.
- Winston
Finally in regard to mobile usability, Foundation and Skeleton uses larger default line height (160%) than Bootstrap does (140%). It would make it easier to tap linked text on small devices. It is one of the good points of the two, I think.Skeleton, on the other hand, is more primitive and smaller in CSS file size (1/10 even without minimization) but still has grid-based layout responsiveness, and is also licensed by the MIT License. As it is smaller than Bootstrap or Foundation, It has fewer components but basic HTML elements, and doesn't use _javascript_, either. If we want to customize our UI heavily, it might be most flexible since it is pure CSS without any preprocessor like Less or Sass.I searched for other CSS-centric web frameworks than Bootstrap and found Foundation <http://foundation.zurb.com/> and Skeleton <http://getskeleton.com/>.Foundation is similar to Bootstrap in concept and is also licensed by the MIT License. Its CSS file is a bit larger than Bootstrap but it wouldn't be a big problem IMO. It seems as widely used as Bootstrap is and it might be an alternative to Bootstrap if we don't need glyphicons at all.
It is a combination of _javascript_ and CSS. _javascript_ is needed only for advanced use. Once you are ready, let me know, I'll explain where to apply the changes. Mean while you might want to read the document I put together several years ago to get an understanding of how Hudson UI is generated.
https://wiki.eclipse.org/Hudson-ci/documentation#Hudson_Architecture_Documents
(both Web/REST and View architectures may be useful)
- Winston
I just learned Bootstrap is mostly implemented in CSS. It looks very easy to use it in any websites so I will try it myself before experimenting it with Hudson. Thank you for the helpful information.
OK, though I am not familiar with Bootstrap at all, I will take a look into it for a long-term solution.
