Add some feedback when performing some actions #552

Here is an example of what it looks like (this is just a test, in reality you can only have one of these messages at the same time):

I don't know if there is a simpler way to do it. Also, I added msg: Option<FlashMessage> to almost all routes to be sure that if a message was present it would be rendered, but maybe it is not necessary and only make the code harder to read? And maybe msg should go in PlumeRocket as it is used almost everywhere?

Fixes #468

Here is an example of what it looks like (this is just a test, in reality you can only have one of these messages at the same time): ![Screenshot_2019-04-27 Plume unu ⋅ Plume](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/16254623/56852089-77178700-690e-11e9-88fc-acb089b58fef.png) I don't know if there is a simpler way to do it. Also, I added `msg: Option<FlashMessage>` to almost all routes to be sure that if a message was present it would be rendered, but maybe it is not necessary and only make the code harder to read? And maybe `msg` should go in `PlumeRocket` as it is used almost everywhere? Fixes #468

Codecov Report

Merging #552 into master will increase coverage by 0.02%.
The diff coverage is 5.12%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #552      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   44.08%   44.11%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          68       68              
  Lines        7937     7984      +47     
==========================================
+ Hits         3499     3522      +23     
- Misses       4438     4462      +24

# [Codecov](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/pull/552?src=pr&el=h1) Report > Merging [#552](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/pull/552?src=pr&el=desc) into [master](https://codecov.io/gh/Plume-org/Plume/commit/787eb7f3992e43e7a149288f3378c90dd4fe4bf8?src=pr&el=desc) will **increase** coverage by `0.02%`. > The diff coverage is `5.12%`. ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## master #552 +/- ## ========================================== + Coverage 44.08% 44.11% +0.02% ========================================== Files 68 68 Lines 7937 7984 +47 ========================================== + Hits 3499 3522 +23 - Misses 4438 4462 +24 ```

And maybe msg should go in PlumeRocket as it is used almost everywhere?

Considering how it must be everywhere, I think it can go in PlumeRocket, as well as in template BaseContext. Also BaseContext could implement From<PlumeRocket> so it is easier to build and reduce duplication

> And maybe `msg` should go in `PlumeRocket` as it is used almost everywhere? Considering how it must be everywhere, I think it can go in `PlumeRocket`, as well as in template `BaseContext`. Also `BaseContext` could implement `From<PlumeRocket>` so it is easier to build and reduce duplication

maybe we should hold on committing the translations in such prs?

do then regularly elsewhere

maybe we should hold on committing the translations in such prs? do then regularly elsewhere

@igalic I don't really know… it is true it pollutes a little bit the diff, but at the same time it makes sense to have them with the change in the interface.

I'd be to not pollute pr with this, and have something that autocommit the changes once a week, or after each merge

👀

:eyes:

👍

:+1:

Do you want me to apply your patch before merging?

It was just to show what I came up with, but having &(&rockets).into() everywhere is definitely worse than importing a trait

It was just to show what I came up with, but having `&(&rockets).into()` everywhere is definitely worse than importing a trait

 @ -17,0 +27,4 @@
         &Connection,
         &Catalog,
         Option<User>,
         Option<(String, String)>,

 @ -17,0 +27,4 @@
         &Connection,
         &Catalog,
         Option<User>,
         Option<(String, String)>,

 @ -17,0 +27,4 @@
         &Connection,
         &Catalog,
         Option<User>,
         Option<(String, String)>,

Етикети Етапи

Add some feedback when performing some actions #552

Codecov Report

Reviewers

Step 1:

Step 2: