LGTM, an unfortunate but needed work-around for the time being. Thanks. Could you also add a card about (or just add now) a test ensuring the behavior.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7179049/diff/1/app/views/topology/service.js File app/views/topology/service.js (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/7179049/diff/1/app/views/topology/service.js#newcode95 app/views/topology/service.js:95: topo.ignoreServiceClick = false; If the state isn't shared it should be encapsulated at the module level, meaning this.ignoreServiceClick. Nothing else need know about or check this state.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7179049/diff/1/app/views/topology/service.js#newcode293 app/views/topology/service.js:293: //d3.event.sourceEvent.preventDefault(); Prune.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7179049/
« Back to merge proposal
LGTM, an unfortunate but needed work-around for the time being. Thanks.
Could you also add a card about (or just add now) a test ensuring the
behavior.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7179049/ diff/1/ app/views/ topology/ service. js topology/ service. js (right):
File app/views/
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7179049/ diff/1/ app/views/ topology/ service. js#newcode95 topology/ service. js:95: topo.ignoreServ iceClick = false; iceClick. Nothing else need know about or check
app/views/
If the state isn't shared it should be encapsulated at the module level,
meaning this.ignoreServ
this state.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7179049/ diff/1/ app/views/ topology/ service. js#newcode293 topology/ service. js:293: sourceEvent. preventDefault( );
app/views/
//d3.event.
Prune.
https:/ /codereview. appspot. com/7179049/