Scroll area for filters and search results

[fiskus]

• Changelog entry (skip if change is not significant to end users, e.g. docs only)

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 55 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (b4a9498) 35.58% compared to head (2ea2d07) 35.55%.

Files	Patch %	Lines
catalog/app/components/Filters/List.tsx	0.00%	20 Missing ⚠️
catalog/app/containers/Search/Search.tsx	0.00%	18 Missing ⚠️
catalog/app/components/Layout/Layout.tsx	0.00%	10 Missing ⚠️
catalog/app/containers/NavBar/NavBar.tsx	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...log/app/components/SearchResults/SearchResults.tsx	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3808      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   35.58%   35.55%   -0.04%     
==========================================
  Files         709      709              
  Lines       31110    31142      +32     
  Branches     4651     4667      +16     
==========================================
  Hits        11071    11071              
- Misses      18892    18924      +32     
  Partials     1147     1147              

Flag	Coverage Δ
api-python	91.22% <ø> (ø)
catalog	10.57% <0.00%> (-0.02%)	⬇️
lambda	86.26% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[nl0]

the ux feels too complicated and clumsy. i believe we can make it simpler by doing away with the custom top/bottom indicators and scrollable containers

[fiskus]

What do you mean by scrollable containers? Containers for keywords filter? It's no longer scrollable, it has "Show more" button, and show the whole list without scroll

Top/bottom indicators are additional buttons, just to show that something is hidden at top or at bottom. You can use scroll instead of buttons. The similar UX is in vertical tabs component https://v4.mui.com/components/tabs/#vertical-tabs

[nl0]

Containers for keywords filter?

nope

It's no longer scrollable, it has "Show more" button, and show the whole list without scroll

that's good

Top/bottom indicators are additional buttons, just to show that something is hidden at top or at bottom. You can use scroll instead of buttons.

i don't think they are necessary and i believe they just clutter the UI.

i meant smth like this, without too much custom logic and controls, just some css positioning stuff:

[fiskus]

Rewrote layout using sticky app header

[nl0]

this feels solid. some cosmetic issues:

1. the background of these inputs should be white i believe, probably some z-index issue

2. filters section could use some margin at the bottom

3. some broken layout in the enum control

tbh i liked the "enclosure" we had around the variants before in this place:

4. sometimes the filters section gets h-scrolled

5. toolbar gradient in both sections: scrolled contents are partially visible in the background:

i think the transparent part should start just below the toolbar contents:

6. seems like there's some z-index issue here (preview bg is visible above the toolbar):

[nl0]

also, while you're at it, it might make sense to fix the enum options wrapping to multiple lines (simple white-space: nowrap would help)

[drernie]

After reviewing:

• these PR comments
• the test stack on SearchMinimal
• Kevin's comments in Slack
• Our Horizon deliverables and strategic needs

I have reluctantly concluded that @fiskus should not spend any more time on this PR, so he can start working on MOAB deliverables with Dima.

My rationale is that successfully shipping MOAB in January is more important than a highly-polished faceted search this month. @kevinemoore has already said that the observed cosmetic issues, though serious, are not blockers. The reality is that most customers will only install a December release in their 'staging' stacks, and may well provide feedback that obsolete portions of this PR.

@nl0 I believe your options are:

1. Ignore this PR and ship the release without it
2. Approve and merge this PR even though it does not address your concerns
3. Find some other way to address them (e.g., fix them yourself)
4. Throw an Exception, if you cannot in good conscience sign off on a release with this feature set

Please let me know at Monday's D&D which way you are leaning. Thanks.