Jon/ui4/login-request

[Jon-edge]

CHANGELOG

Does this branch warrant an entry to the CHANGELOG?

• Yes
• No

Dependencies

none

Description

none

---

• To see the specific tasks where the Asana app for GitHub is being used, see below:
  • https://app.asana.com/0/0/1208644065408248

[swansontec]

Approving is the dangerous action, but denying is safe. I think you have the danger type backwards.

[Jon-edge]

We did go back and forth a lot during spec discussion on this. Ultimately we went with this, because a deny/block/delete/no type button is generally expected to be red.

"Allow" in itself is the opposite of a destructive operation, but in this context, it's dangerous.

The compromise was to add the exclamation marks to convey danger on the secondary "Allow" in the following modal.

Now that you mention this, 'danger' is probably just a bad choice of naming, just like how our legacy 'escape' was also inaccurate. I'll change it.

[swansontec]

I absolutely do not agree with this decision. Who is the "we" in this discussion? You and Madison?

Since "Deny" is the ONLY safe button to press, marking it as "danger" is exactly the opposite of what we want. This completely negates the whole reason we approved this task for the sprint, which was because customers had hit the wrong button and lost all their funds (by "we", I mean the QA / support meeting).

Valid solutions would include making both buttons equal (non-danger), or swapping the danger as I requested (vetoing Madison). I will not approve this PR with "Deny" marked as dangerous. No, your wording change is clever, but not good enough to justify this.

[Jon-edge]

Continuing with the design post discussion because the strongest point of evidence that this aligns with user expectations is that google/apple/etc have the same design:

Red denotes the destructive (red) "Deny/No this wasn't me" action. They go further to even make the "Allow/Yes this was me" the primary action, which we aren't doing in Edge.