Skip to content

Conversation

@shervElmi
Copy link
Contributor

@shervElmi shervElmi commented Dec 23, 2025

Fixes https://github.com/Strategy11/formidable-pro/issues/6142

Updated the repeater Add/Remove buttons in the form builder to match the form preview.

Add-ons Changes

@shervElmi shervElmi self-assigned this Dec 23, 2025
@shervElmi shervElmi marked this pull request as ready for review December 23, 2025 15:18
@shervElmi shervElmi requested a review from Crabcyborg December 23, 2025 15:18
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Dec 23, 2025

Warning

Rate limit exceeded

@shervElmi has exceeded the limit for the number of commits that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 12 minutes and 24 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between c996171 and f708f06.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • css/frm_admin.css
  • resources/scss/admin/backwards-compatibility/pages/_builder.scss

Walkthrough

Removed global button-specific selectors and refactored .frm-page-break pseudo-elements into nested SCSS syntax in the form-rows builder stylesheet; preserved existing visual rules and positions.

Changes

Cohort / File(s) Summary
SCSS form-rows adjustments
resources/scss/admin/components/builder/_form-rows.scss
Removed global .frm_remove_form_row.frm_button and .frm_add_form_row.frm_button selectors; replaced explicit .frm-page-break::before / ::after with nested &::before / &::after; consolidated button-related styling into nested SCSS blocks while keeping original visual properties.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • Crabcyborg
  • garretlaxton

Pre-merge checks

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
Check name Status Explanation
Title check ✅ Passed The title 'Lite: Fix repeater button styling in form builder' directly relates to the changeset, which removes unused button styling and reorganizes CSS for repeater form row buttons.
Description check ✅ Passed The description references the related issue and explains the purpose of updating repeater Add/Remove button styling in the form builder, which matches the actual CSS changes made to button styling.
Docstring Coverage ✅ Passed No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@Crabcyborg Crabcyborg added this to the 6.27 milestone Dec 29, 2025
@shervElmi shervElmi requested a review from Crabcyborg December 30, 2025 07:18
@Crabcyborg
Copy link
Contributor

Also @shervElmi,

It looks like the icon buttons are using other styles still.

Screen Shot 2026-01-02 at 12 44 32 PM

@shervElmi
Copy link
Contributor Author

shervElmi commented Jan 2, 2026

Also @shervElmi,

It looks like the icon buttons are using other styles still.

@Crabcyborg the PR also includes Pro changes, and you can find the Pro PR in the description.

@Crabcyborg
Copy link
Contributor

@shervElmi That's only a size change? I'm seeing issues with colour.

@Crabcyborg
Copy link
Contributor

@shervElmi If I have that branch checked out, it still doesn't reflect the icon I have selected in my style.

I'm wondering if we want to bother with parts of this update though. The builder isn't really 100% the same as the style. Since the builder does not have a background colour, we don't really want to show a white button here in the builder.

I think we should at least show the right icon though, since that shouldn't cause any issues.

Screen Shot 2026-01-02 at 12 50 16 PM

@shervElmi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Crabcyborg, I just want to make sure we are on the same page.

If a user changes the Repeater field icons, do you want me to use that icon in the Form Builder as well, where we build forms and not on the Style page?

If yes, with the icon you selected, the same background will appear in the Form Builder, and the frontend also have a background for that icon since the icon itself includes one.

Could you please clarify what you would like me to do exactly, aside from moving the styles to builder.css in the Pro add on?


I have applied the icon you selected in the Form Builder page to illustrate what it would look like with that icon:

CleanShot 2026-01-05 at 15 55 27@2x

@Crabcyborg
Copy link
Contributor

@shervElmi I think it would be best if we showed the repeater icons on both pages. The styler already supports this, but the builder doesn't.

We can also apply some style settings. I just don't think we should modify colour, as it's at risk of causing visibility issues.

@shervElmi
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Crabcyborg, this PR and the related Pro PR are ready to merge.

The buttons styles are now consistent across all pages, including the Builder, Style, and frontend.

Builder Page

CleanShot 2026-01-05 at 18 48 49@2x

Style Page

CleanShot 2026-01-05 at 18 49 09@2x

Frontend

CleanShot 2026-01-05 at 18 49 27@2x

@shervElmi shervElmi requested a review from Crabcyborg January 5, 2026 15:52
@Crabcyborg Crabcyborg modified the milestones: 6.27, 6.28 Jan 5, 2026
@shervElmi shervElmi requested a review from Crabcyborg January 5, 2026 19:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants