Repository navigation
fix: 676 ux dropdown messages #26
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
Changes from all commits
7962ae5
f04ffd6
8407f4d
6e4e540
30f1c3b
1414b32
5b630b8
8543dd6
22e1b49
4ccabb2
48fcf24
4b30725
9e43efb
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ export default { | |
| actorId: { | ||
| type: "string", | ||
| label: "Actor", | ||
| description: "Select the Actor, enter the Actor ID, or use a tilde-separated combination of the owner's username and the Actor name.", | ||
| description: "Select an Actor from the dropdown, enter an Actor ID, or use a tilde-separated owner/name identifier (e.g. `apify~web-scraper`). If the list is empty, switch \"Search Actors from\" to **Apify Store Actors**.", | ||
| async options({ | ||
| page, actorSource, | ||
| }) { | ||
|
|
@@ -168,6 +168,15 @@ export default { | |
| limit: LIMIT, | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| if (page === 0 && items.length === 0 && actorSource !== "store") { | ||
| return [ | ||
| { | ||
| label: "No recent Actors, switch to \"Apify Store Actors\" above", | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Important:
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Handled it in base.mjs activate(), which now throws a ConfigurationError before creating the webhook if the condition target is empty. Thanks |
||
| value: "", | ||
| }, | ||
| ]; | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| return items.map((actor) => ({ | ||
| label: this.formatActorOrTaskLabel(actor), | ||
| value: actor.id, | ||
|
|
||
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ export default { | |
| actorSource: { | ||
| type: "string", | ||
| label: "Search Actors from", | ||
| description: "Where to search for Actors. Valid options are Store and Recently used Actors.", | ||
| description: "Where to search for Actors. Choose **Apify Store Actors** to browse the public [Apify Store](https://apify.com/store), or **Recently used Actors** to pick from Actors you've run before.", | ||
|
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Important: this component's content changed but
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. thanks, will do in next commit |
||
| options: [ | ||
| { | ||
| label: "Apify Store Actors", | ||
|
|
@@ -56,6 +56,9 @@ export default { | |
| actorId: this.actorId, | ||
| }; | ||
| }, | ||
| getEmptyConditionMessage() { | ||
| return "No Actor selected. If the list was empty, set \"Search Actors from\" to \"Apify Store Actors\" and pick an Actor before deploying."; | ||
| }, | ||
| getSummary(body) { | ||
| return `A new Actor run ${body.eventData.actorRunId} has finished`; | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
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.
Note: About breaking change, can we just keep the field, but just make it hidden somehow?
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.
Hiding the old field would only preserve behavior by making the new "Wait for Finish" toggle silently inert for existing steps, so I think that clean rename is the better trade.
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.
OK, it that case we need to do breaking change, can you check what this means, maybe we would need to bump version?
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.
yeah, we resolve the breaking change via version bump, 0.0.7 -> 0.0.8 (which is already covered)
existing deployed steps stay pinned to their old version, so they keep working fine