Bug 598828

Summary: Revision history formatting is difficult to read
Product: [Community] Publican Reporter: Dana Mison <dmison>
Component: publicanAssignee: Jeff Fearn <jfearn>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: low    
Version: 1.6CC: jfearn, mmcallis, publican-list, r.landmann
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2010-07-11 23:51:04 EDT Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---
Description Flags
current appearance in html
proposed appearance
My take on the revision history layout none

Description Dana Mison 2010-06-02 02:23:03 EDT
Description of problem:
The formatting of the revision history makes it difficult to read.  I would be nice to have them layed out with a bit more whitespace.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

Screenshots attached of current & a proposal using the html format as the example.
Comment 1 Dana Mison 2010-06-02 02:23:47 EDT
Created attachment 418929 [details]
current appearance in html
Comment 2 Dana Mison 2010-06-02 02:24:35 EDT
Created attachment 418930 [details]
proposed appearance
Comment 3 Jeff Fearn 2010-06-09 20:33:55 EDT
Created attachment 422739 [details]
My take on the revision history layout

Here is my take on what would look better, let me know what you think.
Comment 4 Dana Mison 2010-06-09 20:52:52 EDT
I would still like to have the horizontal line under the rev#/date/author, but that is just a personal aesthetics I think.

I would be quite happy with that layout.
Comment 5 Ruediger Landmann 2010-06-09 21:11:24 EDT
(In reply to comment #3)

> Here is my take on what would look better, let me know what you think.    

Looks good to me :)

Darrin -- the horizontal line under the rev/date/author looks confusing to me; I need to look twice to work out which description goes with which rev/date/author line; ie, is the rev/date/author line a header or a footer for the change described? I would need a bigger, thicker line to separate the revisions in that case.
Comment 6 Jeff Fearn 2010-06-10 00:03:37 EDT
Reformated PDF and HTML revision history.

Fixed in build: 1.6.3-0.t101
Comment 7 Ruediger Landmann 2010-07-11 23:51:04 EDT
Confirmed fixed in 2.1