fix(DATAGO-123628): Match node popover header to node type for logic nodes #969
+12
−4
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
WhiteSource Policy Violation Summary✅︎ No Blocking Whitesource Policy Violations found in solaceai/solace-agent-mesh-ui-pr-969! |
|
lgh-solace
approved these changes
Feb 9, 2026
| // Get the title (always show node name, regardless of view mode) | ||
| const title = node.type === "agent" ? agentDisplayName || node.data.agentName || node.id : node.data.workflowName || node.id; | ||
| const title = | ||
| node.type === "agent" |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tricksy - could make this moreable, but makes sense!
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
What is the purpose of this change?
Match node popover header to node type for logic nodes
before:
After:
How was this change implemented?
Key Design Decisions (optional - delete if not applicable)
How was this change tested?
Is there anything the reviewers should focus on/be aware of?