Search Ideas
2293 ideas match your query.:
This could inadvertently hide dormant but important ideas.
This requires manual action. Could mean a lot of work depending on the discussion.
Proposed solution: ideas could be archived automatically if they haven’t been revised or criticized in 90 days, say.
Proposed solution: edit a discussion to hide top-level ideas. That way, discussion owners can hide ideas they no longer deem relevant.
For example, completed tasks in discussions used as issue trackers, like this Meta thread, could be hidden so they don’t pollute the thread.
There could be a button for users to reveal hidden ideas so nothing is lost or hidden dishonestly. And direct links to hidden ideas would continue to work.
Old ideas can pollute discussions. Like in this meta thread.
I can still reproduce the issue by clicking on the button to collapse/expand an idea.
Feature idea: edit a discussion to hide top-level ideas. That way, discussion owners can hide ideas they no longer deem relevant.
For example, completed tasks in discussions used as issue trackers, like this Meta thread, could be hidden so they don’t pollute the thread.
There could be a button for users to reveal hidden ideas so nothing is lost or hidden dishonestly. And direct links to hidden ideas would continue to work.
Feature idea: edit a discussion to hide ideas. That way, discussion owners can hide ideas they no longer deem relevant. (For example, completed tasks in discussions used as issue trackers, like this Meta thread.) There could be a button for users to reveal hidden ideas so nothing is lost of hidden dishonestly.
This problem will surface rarely – users would have to hit cmd + f immediately upon opening the page. For most users, by the time they start typing, the page is already fully loaded. So this seems like a small price to pay in exchange for discussion pages that always render faster.
Now that parts of the page are purposely and visually disabled (see #2694), users may not expect everything to be working 100% during a loading state.
I now purposely prevent interactions with buttons and gutters, and gray them out, until the page is fully loaded. So instead of broken hover effects and interactions, the user gets intentionally disabled elements, and this intentionality is communicated to them.
Once the page is fully loaded, buttons and gutters are enabled and visually restored.
Since the browser’s loading indicator remains visible until then, this behavior shouldn’t violate user expectation.
That means duplicate functionality; anytime I customize Devise in the future, I’ll have to remember to adjust this one method as well.
I could override authenticate_user! in the DiscussionsController.
I could extract discussions#show into a new, separate StreamController or something like it. That controller would not use Devise.
Then again, I’d want to redirect users to the sign-in page (and then ideally back to where they were trying to go).
The thread suggests a workaround: use authenticated do … blocks in routes.rb instead of before_action :authenticate_user! in controllers.
It’s probably a good idea to do this anyway to avoid divulging the existence of routes that unauthenticated users don’t need to know exist. (They will get a 404 instead of a 401.)
The thread suggests solution: use authenticated do … blocks in routes.rb instead of before_action :authenticate_user! in controllers.
It’s probably a good idea to do this anyway to avoid divulging the existence of routes that unauthenticated users don’t need to know exist. (They will get a 404 instead of a 401.)
I could render the first ~10 top-level ideas immediately and only render the rest as turbo frames off screen. By the time the user scrolls down, they should all be loaded.
Yes, it would be even worse than #2677 (see criticism #2681), where only top-level ideas were turbo frames.
Too many requests when there are enough top-level ideas.
I just tried this. Seemed promising at first but sometimes ideas load out of order. Looks horrible.