-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3k
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: physical layout consistency #2595
refactor: physical layout consistency #2595
Conversation
00e5c51
to
c03a093
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I generally favor this approach over #2582. One point of discussion.
6c34b67
to
192931c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One question/issue with the map override approach taken here.
192931c
to
41c71d2
Compare
41c71d2
to
610896c
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. @caksoylar thoughts on the docs?
a8ce515
to
d29a952
Compare
d29a952
to
d11829d
Compare
Should be all good now. |
An alternative approach to #2582, as suggested by Joel and supported by Pete. Felt multiple PRs would be better here, to allow us to compare the different versions more directly.
Overall it looks nice, but future refactors to make a layout shared would still often be slightly more involved than dragging and dropping into the shared folder - multiple layouts present = need to be uncoupled.