Hey Francesco. This looks very good. Thank you. I am chatty in the line-by-line comments but I only ask for one or two things, and you may ignore them if you disagree. You will almost certainly want to merge trunk by hand before you land this, since (thanks to your review) I have landed the "related charms" addition to the description pane, and you'll need to make sure that it has necessary changes to look good with your improvements. Thanks again, Gary https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars File app/templates/charm-description.handlebars (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars#newcode2 app/templates/charm-description.handlebars:2:
Back
(As we discussed, we have a separate card for converting these to the desired assets.) https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars#newcode10 app/templates/charm-description.handlebars:10:
yay, we actually reused a class name in the charm panel! will wonders never cease? :-) thank you for being thoughtful with this https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars#newcode23 app/templates/charm-description.handlebars:23: {{#if owner}} I think I have a similar block that instead draws "[charmers]" for the owner name. I think I prefer your solution. I don't think we have a specification for this. If we do, go with that; otherwise, make your own choice, and I suggest sticking with what you have here. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars#newcode60 app/templates/charm-description.handlebars:60:

Change Log

I had intentionally diverged from the "Change Log" text because I thought a single change was not a log. This is what was specified though, you are right. +1 on this change. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-description.handlebars#newcode63 app/templates/charm-description.handlebars:63:
Last Change
Oh, I see. That's fine. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-pre-configuration.handlebars File app/templates/charm-pre-configuration.handlebars (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/app/templates/charm-pre-configuration.handlebars#newcode43 app/templates/charm-pre-configuration.handlebars:43:
Moving this into the service settings was a conscious decision by the devs who did it, I think, even though the visual design had it here. The configuration file replaces the configuration form, and IIRC makes it hide. In this particular case, I suggest moving it back where it was before, in the "Service Settings." OTOH, if you disagree for any reason, you have the visual design on your side, so I'm happy for this change to win in that case. :-) It also doesn't look quite right--it needs some left padding--but I'm figuring you want to hold off on that change for another branch. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/lib/views/stylesheet.less File lib/views/stylesheet.less (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newcode785 lib/views/stylesheet.less:785: } This looks good, and I love the fact that we don't have to have JS for this. OTOH, though I was reconciled to not having FF and trying to get agreement on that limitation, I thought we could have IE 10: after some research that you probably also did, it looks like that CSS is a bad idea (it does not allow changing width, and reportedly using the IE scriollbar color CSS forces older-style scrollbars, per http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4053220/css-scrollbar-width). I guess let's make this change and see if anyone complains--in which case I suppose we'll have to try the JS thing. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/lib/views/stylesheet.less#newcode789 lib/views/stylesheet.less:789: .customize-scrollbar; oh, that's cool. I hadn't really registered the LESS mixin approach. https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/test/test_charm_panel.js File test/test_charm_panel.js (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/test/test_charm_panel.js#newcode216 test/test_charm_panel.js:216: html.all('div.charm-section').size().should.equal(1); Nicer, thanks https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/test/test_charm_panel.js#newcode230 test/test_charm_panel.js:230: sections = html.all('.charm-section'), ah, that's nicer, thanks https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/diff/6001/test/test_charm_panel.js#newcode253 test/test_charm_panel.js:253: section_container = html.one('div.charm-section:last-child'); This might break with my branch...or might not. :-) https://codereview.appspot.com/6819098/