Conversation
Bumps [Blazored.LocalStorage](https://github.com/Blazored/LocalStorage) from 4.1.5 to 4.2.0. - [Release notes](https://github.com/Blazored/LocalStorage/releases) - [Commits](Blazored/LocalStorage@v4.1.5...v4.2.0) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: Blazored.LocalStorage dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-minor ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Bumps [MudBlazor](https://github.com/MudBlazor/MudBlazor) from 6.0.5 to 6.0.6. - [Release notes](https://github.com/MudBlazor/MudBlazor/releases) - [Changelog](https://github.com/MudBlazor/MudBlazor/blob/dev/CHANGELOG.md) - [Commits](MudBlazor/MudBlazor@v6.0.5...v6.0.6) --- updated-dependencies: - dependency-name: MudBlazor dependency-type: direct:production update-type: version-update:semver-patch ... Signed-off-by: dependabot[bot] <support@github.com>
Bump MudBlazor from 6.0.5 to 6.0.6
…rage-4.2.0 Bump Blazored.LocalStorage from 4.1.5 to 4.2.0
|
I would actually not put the ID on there at all... especially the way it is now with If a user of the table wants to show the id in there somewhere, he can put it in the EditFormContent himself. I would simply get rid of it here. |
|
I proposed this feature because as information is not very useful to the common user. |
|
Yes, exactly as I am saying... it's not useful in most of cases, and when you really want it, you can still add it in the EditFormContent yourself... so still "the opportunity to view" ;-) And this would mean a lot less code and complexity in the addeditform... |
|
I understood, then would you like to eliminate it directly from the default template? |
|
Yes, that's what I mean... but that's just my opinion... @iammukeshm might think something else? Or anybody else? I was just opening the discussion here ;-) I actually already removed it before in one of my commits... It has been put back in the mean time... not sure why. |
A cute thing could be to have the visibility of the configurable fields (at least those in the list) |
|
in my opinion this is adding unneeded complexity to achieve something that can quite easy be done manually (by removing the column in the view) |
3 participants
No description provided.