re-ordering the tabs

John Mazzitelli mazz at redhat.com
Mon Nov 29 15:46:00 UTC 2010


I'm looking at the tabs, and I don't see any rhyme or reason why they 
are ordered the way they are:

Summary, Monitor, Inventory, Operations, Alerts, Configuration, Events

Can I recommend we change this order to:

Summary, Inventory, Alert, Monitor, Operations, Configuration, Events

for the following reasons:

Summary, Inventory relate to what makes up the resource - what it IS - 
it defines the resource itself and how its constituted. So we keep them 
together and up front.

Alerts relate to what the resource did or is doing that is abnormal - 
its really standalone. But we have it here, third, for a reason, see below.

Monitor, Operations, Configuration, Events are all subsystems that 
describe what the resource is doing or can do. Thus, we keep them all 
together. Since Operations, Config and Events are optional, they appear 
after Monitor (thus, since Monitor always exists, its always first in 
this group, the other three can appear in any combination depending on 
the resource type).

Note:

Summary, Inventory, Alert and Monitor always exist - so the first four 
tabs will always be in the same place for any resource (i.e. the UI will 
be consistent no matter what resource you are looking for).  e.g. If I 
want to go to an alert tab, I know, regardless of what resource I'm 
looking at, I need to go to the third tab.

And for groups, its basically the same - the first THREE tabs are always 
the same. So, no matter what I'm looking at - a compat group, mixed 
group, auto-group or individual resource, the first three tabs are 
always the same. Full consistency of the tabs across every view - the 
only tabs that come and go are the subsystem tabs and they are on the 
far right - the location of summary, inventory, alerts, monitor never move.

Unless there are objections, I would like to alter the tabs so they 
appear in the order as described above.



More information about the rhq-devel mailing list