-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
[dashboard] Better display of workspace names #10773
Comments
@gtsiolis Any thoughts on this? |
This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions. |
Dear stale bot, please don't close this issue. Thank you in advance. |
Thanks for opening this, @david-bakin! The core issue starts with the unnecessary or duplicate information of the context URL, repository name, and workspace description which we allow users to change. Some improvements described in #3594 should already cover mot of the issues raised here. Differentiating pinned workspaces is something we probably need, follow #10921 for updates. Let me close this in favor of #12033 where we're tracking improvements to the workspaces page. Thanks for the ping, @geropl! 🏓 PS. @david-bakin If you think there's valuable feedback that is not captured in the linked issues above please open a new issue. Having a small scope can also help us keep track of it, plan, and prioritize a fix sooner. |
Users are allowed to name their workspaces - but the name appears at the end of the repo name - and there isn't much space for it! See here where the names are "latest" and "tapscript-<something-too-long-to-show>":
Maybe put the name first - or on a separate line if it gets too long?
(Also - of the two workspaces shown above one is pinned, the other not. It would be nice to have a visual indication of that somehow.)
Names are useful - in some use cases (much) more useful than branch names to keep what's in different workspaces clear in your head - it would be nice to have longer ones. In fact, one reason I spend time deleting inactive workspaces is because the names are relatively useless to tell me which one's which, so I delete the known useless ones to remove some confusion. Simply folding them away doesn't really help this use case ...
(You might wonder why I have long-lived workspaces when much of gitpod.io's own promotions for its service involve a workflow that frequently creates short-lived branches and merges them immediately. (E.g., most of your introductory videos - which are very good by the way! - on youtube.) The reason is that I work on fairly large "features" - and keep going and going on a given branch with
git commit --amend
. I have several branches in progress at a time - but do all the work in one workspace, generally, switching between them withgit branch
rather than via separate workspaces. Perhaps it could be considered a more "traditional" workflow? "retro" even? Or possibly just fuddy-duddy. Or maybe also (as I believe) it reflects the different nature of working on backend server code vs. web development/full stack development. Or maybe its just me ... but, no, I think it possible other people work this way too ...)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: