-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 367
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
frontend: Add secrets store page #1659
Conversation
7438d7a
to
2a6aaad
Compare
2a6aaad
to
63d7205
Compare
c153ed6
to
6263e03
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'll check the rest later, for now I've put some preliminary review.
const [showValue, setShowValue] = useBoolean(false); | ||
|
||
return ( | ||
<FormControl isInvalid={!!field.state.meta.errors?.length}> |
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.
nit: I though we had a PasswordInput component in the existing UI lib. Since we're using components from that library withing the file, could we use it as well?
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.
Let's use this for now, the reason being is that this is a new component that uses tanstack form, I don't want to mix it up with the old implementation from component library. Also when using AI LLMs it doesn't work well with UI library because it does not have enough context of our internal API.
|
||
// Hack for MobX to ensure we don't need to use observables | ||
export const updatePageTitle = () => { | ||
runInAction(() => { |
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.
nit: I'd still prefer to stay consistent with the upper-level mobx classes to handle the logic and remove it with MobX later on. I think we would benefit from consistency.
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.
Agree, I am trying to move quite fast, so I had to resort to this to ensure the title is set properly, otherwise it was overriding it.
The problem I have is that with MobX decorators and class-based components or observer pattern I will never get out of the legacy/tech debt we have today, so I decided this is the best we can do for now.
This is required because otherwise tests won't match the style guide
ed2c556
to
2bdd7de
Compare
c236493
to
3755ab5
Compare
3755ab5
to
4ef2c77
Compare
4ef2c77
to
4fa3410
Compare
https://www.loom.com/share/580f2fe891554ab0958c4263f4514482?sid=96037fc0-9bfe-4e57-9f47-d5b9e7479324






