Skip to content

Refine dialog component#26033

Merged
MarkEWaite merged 9 commits intojenkinsci:masterfrom
janfaracik:refine-dialog
Feb 9, 2026
Merged

Refine dialog component#26033
MarkEWaite merged 9 commits intojenkinsci:masterfrom
janfaracik:refine-dialog

Conversation

@janfaracik
Copy link
Member

@janfaracik janfaracik commented Jan 2, 2026

Small refinements to benefit jenkinsci/credentials-plugin#992

  • Clicking the title no longer closes the dialog
  • Bottom app bars now work well in dialogs
  • New borderless bottom app bar for when controls above it already have borders (e.g. Refine the 'New Item' screen #26031)
  • Dark themes now have a subtle border around the edge for better contrast
  • New option to prevent closing dialogs on outside click

Testing done

  • Dialogs look as expected, checked dialogs in core and Design Library

Screenshots (UI changes only)

Before

Screenshot 2026-01-27 at 09 38 09

After

image

Proposed changelog entries

  • N/A

Proposed changelog category

/label web-ui,rfe,developer
/remove-label skip-changelog

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

  • The issue, if it exists, is well-described.
  • The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples). Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during upgrade.
  • There is automated testing or an explanation as to why this change has no tests.
  • New public classes, fields, and methods are annotated with @Restricted or have @since TODO Javadocs, as appropriate.
  • New deprecations are annotated with @Deprecated(since = "TODO") or @Deprecated(forRemoval = true, since = "TODO"), if applicable.
  • UI changes do not introduce regressions when enforcing the current default rules of Content Security Policy Plugin. In particular, new or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
  • For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
  • For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.

Desired reviewers

@jenkinsci/sig-ux

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

Maintainer checklist

  • There are at least two (2) approvals for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
  • Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
  • Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
  • Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically.
  • If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
  • If it would make sense to backport the change to LTS, be a Bug or Improvement, and either the issue or pull request must be labeled as lts-candidate to be considered.

@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot bot added web-ui The PR includes WebUI changes which may need special expertise rfe For changelog: Minor enhancement. use `major-rfe` for changes to be highlighted skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog labels Jan 2, 2026
@daniel-beck daniel-beck added the squash-merge-me Unclean or useless commit history, should be merged only with squash-merge label Jan 4, 2026
@janfaracik janfaracik marked this pull request as ready for review January 27, 2026 09:38
@janfaracik janfaracik requested a review from a team January 27, 2026 10:04
@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot bot added developer Changes which impact plugin developers and removed skip-changelog Should not be shown in the changelog labels Jan 27, 2026
Copy link
Member

@timja timja left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, tested with credentials plugin

@timja timja requested a review from a team January 27, 2026 10:37
@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Jan 27, 2026

Small PR appreciate a review @jenkinsci/sig-ux thanks!

Copy link
Contributor

@lewisbirks lewisbirks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Checked it out in the design library and it looks fine

@timja
Copy link
Member

timja commented Feb 6, 2026

/label ready-for-merge


This PR is now ready for merge, after ~24 hours, we will merge it if there's no negative feedback.

Thanks!

@comment-ops-bot comment-ops-bot bot added the ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback label Feb 6, 2026
@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite merged commit a3f2c15 into jenkinsci:master Feb 9, 2026
18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

developer Changes which impact plugin developers ready-for-merge The PR is ready to go, and it will be merged soon if there is no negative feedback rfe For changelog: Minor enhancement. use `major-rfe` for changes to be highlighted squash-merge-me Unclean or useless commit history, should be merged only with squash-merge web-ui The PR includes WebUI changes which may need special expertise

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants