On 2/11/2015 6:55 AM, kpolb...@olberg.name wrote:
> I guess it would break the current UI to have collapsible groups. And it
> might not have been the most thought through proposal :) I do however
> still feel there is a use for a separator. With regards to your comment
> on "over engineering". "If
On 02/10/2015 11:05 PM, Espen Johansen wrote:
A seperator might make sense. But grouping and hiding rules is a bad
idea based on my experience.
A tree structure that is allways collapsed is annoying when you need
overview of all rules.
And defaulting to a expanded look will just act as a s
A seperator might make sense. But grouping and hiding rules is a bad idea
based on my experience.
A tree structure that is allways collapsed is annoying when you need
overview of all rules.
And defaulting to a expanded look will just act as a seperator.
Imho interface tabs acts as grouping enough.
On 02/10/2015 07:04 PM, Christoph Hanle wrote:
On 10.02.2015 14:44, kpolb...@olberg.name wrote:
Hi,
Is there any possibility to create "groups" or otherwise have seperators
between rules on the firewall page? Basically what I'm trying to do is
make it easier to see which rules are "connected"
On 10.02.2015 14:44, kpolb...@olberg.name wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any possibility to create "groups" or otherwise have seperators
> between rules on the firewall page? Basically what I'm trying to do is
> make it easier to see which rules are "connected" could be based on host
> or service. So i
That would be cool.
On Tue, Feb 10, 2015 at 6:44 AM, wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Is there any possibility to create "groups" or otherwise have seperators
> between rules on the firewall page? Basically what I'm trying to do is make
> it easier to see which rules are "connected" could be based on host or
>
Hi,
Is there any possibility to create "groups" or otherwise have seperators
between rules on the firewall page? Basically what I'm trying to do is
make it easier to see which rules are "connected" could be based on host
or service. So it would be nice to have some sort of visual seperator to
