refactor: [M3-9435] [Akamai Design System] Breadcrumb Component #11841
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
bill-akamai
requested review from
hkhalil-akamai and
cliu-akamai
and removed request for
a team
hkhalil-akamai
approved these changes
Mar 17, 2025
hkhalil-akamai
added
Add'tl Approval Needed
bill-akamai
changed the title
bnussman-akamai
requested changes
Mar 18, 2025
…lass name handling in Crumbs
|
Looks good but I'm still seeing the spacing issue mention in my comment |
|
Cloud Manager UI test results🎉 539 passing tests on test run #10 ↗︎
|
bnussman-akamai
approved these changes
Mar 21, 2025
bnussman-akamai
added
Approved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description 📝
This PR updates the Breadcrumb component to conform to the Akamai Design System specifications.
Changes 🔄
cxutility for cleaner class names inEditableText.tsxPreview 📷
Verification steps
Author Checklists
As an Author, to speed up the review process, I considered 🤔
👀 Doing a self review
❔ Our contribution guidelines
🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
➕ Adding a changeset
🧪 Providing/improving test coverage
🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
📑 Providing or updating our documentation
🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
📱 Providing mobile support
♿ Providing accessibility support
As an Author, before moving this PR from Draft to Open, I confirmed ✅