On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 11:12 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
> On 30 May 2013 11:33, Dave Page <dpage@pgadmin.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:09 PM, Thom Brown <thom@linux.com> wrote:
>>> That should be the case with the "hide unchanged features" checkbox
>>> checked anyway. The rule is, if it's the same value across all
>>> displayed versions (regardless of whether they're all "Yes", "No" or
>>> "Obsolete"), the row becomes hidden.
>>
>> Yeah, I get that. I'm just suggesting that obsolete features should be
>> treated differently, as they're even less interesting than something
>> that was implemented before the first version show.
>
> Well it still seems like an unnecessary complication of yet another
> checkbox for the sake of 6 affected features. I could add it if you
> really want it. The rule would be that if any of the displayed
> versions for a particular feature contain "Obsolete" then the row is
> hidden.
My original suggestion was just to hide them always. I still think
that's fine. I have no particular desire for a checkbox for this, but
suggested it in case anyone did.
>> Regardless of that, I do think that checkbox should be on it's own line. And everything centred to look tidier.
>
> Latest version does that.
That looks much nicer :-)
> And while we're doing this, would we want to add 7.4 back in? It's in
> the database anyway, or is it just too old?
It does help show the progression of the project, and there is
certainly room for the checkbox. I don't object to including it.
--
Dave Page
Blog: http://pgsnake.blogspot.com
Twitter: @pgsnake
EnterpriseDB UK: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
