Patchwork work by SJuliez · Pull Request #2149 · MegaMek/megameklab

SJuliez · 2026-03-06T15:33:57Z

Some GUI changes for patchwork armor:

CV, ASF and BM now use the same armor setup in the right column: armor view, patchwork selector and armor allocation; other views have been moved away
as before, the patchwork selector is only shown when patchwork armor is selected
as the patchwork selector can have many locations to select for, some fields and buttons in the other views that are not used for patchwork armor are now hidden instead of disabled so that the total height stays more or less the same
fixes [Issue] Patchwork armor calculation based on head location armor type only #1803 (the wrong armor weight calculation is no longer shown; the armor weight in the summary is correct)
fixes: when an armor type is selected that doesnt fit, the armor type resetting to Standard is now actually visible
also some slight formatting changes, more field width for the armor tonnage, standard layout (right-aligned labels, same-size entry fields)

Also,

GUI code updates (GridBagLayout)
a help notice saying that for patchwork, armor weight is calculated from the points rather than the other way around. I found this not immediately obvious

…r allocation column, armortype industrial fix

Copilot

Pull request overview

This PR updates MegaMekLab’s armor UI to better support patchwork armor workflows across multiple unit types, including aligning panel placement, improving patchwork selection visibility, and clarifying patchwork-specific weight behavior (per #1803).

Changes:

Reorganizes armor-related panels (armor view, patchwork selector, allocation) for CV/ASF/BM and adjusts layout to keep heights consistent by hiding patchwork-irrelevant controls.
Improves patchwork selection UX by refreshing the patchwork selector when an ineligible armor choice is rejected.
Updates i18n strings and adds a patchwork help notice (“armor weight is calculated from the assigned points”).

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 10 out of 10 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

Show a summary per file

File	Description
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/supportVehicle/SVArmorTab.java	Patchwork rejection dialog parent + refresh patchwork selector after reset.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/mek/BMStructureTab.java	Panel order tweak; patchwork rejection dialog parent + patchwork selector refresh.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/largeAero/WSStructureTab.java	Removes no-op `patchworkChanged` override.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/largeAero/DSStructureTab.java	Removes no-op `patchworkChanged` override.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/generalUnit/PatchworkArmorView.java	Layout tweaks, filtering cleanup, prototype sizing, and minor refactor helpers.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/generalUnit/MVFArmorView.java	Patchwork-mode UI hides irrelevant fields and shows patchwork info; i18n cleanup.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/generalUnit/ArmorAllocationView.java	Uses display fields + i18n cleanup; hides non-patchwork-relevant controls in patchwork mode.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/fighterAero/ASStructureTab.java	Moves transport panel; refreshes patchwork selector on rejection; uses `setFromEntity(..., true)` when refreshing armor view.
megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/combatVehicle/CVStructureTab.java	Reorders panels to standardize armor UI placement.
megameklab/resources/megameklab/resources/Views.properties	Updates labels and adds patchwork info string.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-03-06T15:44:05Z

megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/mek/BMStructureTab.java

        if (getMek().getEmptyCriticalSlots(location) < crits) {
-            JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(
-                  null, armor.getName()
-                        + " does not fit in location "
-                        + getMek().getLocationName(location)
-                        + ". Resetting to Standard Armor in this location.",
+            JOptionPane.showMessageDialog(this,
+                  "%s does not fit in location %s. Resetting to Standard Armor in this location."
+                        .formatted(armor.getName(), getMek().getLocationName(location)),
                  "Error",
                  JOptionPane.INFORMATION_MESSAGE);
-            UnitUtil.resetArmor(getMek(), location);
+            panPatchwork.setFromEntity(getMek());
        } else {


After the failure path (getEmptyCriticalSlots < crits), the method calls UnitUtil.resetArmor(...) and then refreshes the UI. However, later in this method panArmor.setFromEntity(getMek()) (outside this hunk) may clear the patchwork checkbox / hide the patchwork UI when the entity no longer reports hasPatchworkArmor() after the reset. Other tabs call panArmor.setFromEntity(..., true) in similar situations to keep the user-selected patchwork mode stable. Consider updating the armor view refresh in this flow to use the ignoreEntityPatchwork=true overload so the reset-to-standard outcome is visible without exiting patchwork mode.

this is valid; the patchwork checkbox should not become unchecked by selecting some armor type in a location (but it does happen), but this seemed like a complicated issue and I did not want to address it herein

Copilot · 2026-03-06T15:44:06Z

megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/generalUnit/MVFArmorView.java

+     * @return True when the patchwork checkbox is selected; this is not equivalent to the unit having patchwork
+     * armor (entity.hasPatchworkArmor()); it only has when it there are actually two different armor types installed.


Javadoc for isPatchwork() has a couple grammar issues ("it only has when it there are actually...") and is a bit hard to parse. Suggest rephrasing so it clearly states that the checkbox state can differ from entity.hasPatchworkArmor() and under what condition hasPatchworkArmor() becomes true (multiple armor types installed).

Suggested change

* @return True when the patchwork checkbox is selected; this is not equivalent to the unit having patchwork

* armor (entity.hasPatchworkArmor()); it only has when it there are actually two different armor types installed.

* @return {@code true} if the patchwork checkbox is selected. This indicates only the current UI selection and

* may differ from whether the unit actually has patchwork armor

* ({@code entity.hasPatchworkArmor()}). The unit is considered to have patchwork armor only when

* multiple different armor types are installed.

valid; changed the text

Copilot · 2026-03-06T15:44:06Z

megameklab/src/megameklab/ui/generalUnit/ArmorAllocationView.java


    private void initUI() {
-        tooltipFormat = resourceMap.getString("ArmorAllocationView.locationTooltip.format");
+        txtUnallocated.setEditable(false);


Only txtUnallocated is explicitly made non-editable, but the other summary fields (txtAllocated, txtTotal, txtMaxPossible, txtWasted, txtPointsPerTon) were previously read-only too. Other views still call setEditable(false) on DisplayTextField, so if it’s editable by default these fields will now accept input that doesn’t do anything. Consider setting all of these display-only fields to setEditable(false) (and optionally setFocusable(false)) to preserve prior UX.

Suggested change

txtUnallocated.setEditable(false);

txtUnallocated.setEditable(false);

txtAllocated.setEditable(false);

txtTotal.setEditable(false);

txtMaxPossible.setEditable(false);

txtWasted.setEditable(false);

txtPointsPerTon.setEditable(false);

removed the setEditable; DisplayTextFields are uneditable by default

SJuliez added 5 commits March 3, 2026 22:42

PatchworkArmorView code/GUI update

021b263

Merge branch 'main' into patchwork-work

31a8a9c

PatchworkArmorView code/GUI updates, right panel armor/patchwork/armo…

cb69b03

…r allocation column, armortype industrial fix

Patchwork update when resetting to standard armor

a297e6a

license, I18N

6756197

SJuliez requested a review from a team as a code owner March 6, 2026 15:33

HammerGS requested a review from Copilot March 6, 2026 15:36

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of HammerGS March 6, 2026 15:37 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

javadoc, redundant code

193844c

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Patchwork work#2149

Patchwork work#2149
SJuliez wants to merge 6 commits intoMegaMek:mainfrom
SJuliez:patchwork-work

SJuliez commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

		* @return True when the patchwork checkbox is selected; this is not equivalent to the unit having patchwork
		* armor (entity.hasPatchworkArmor()); it only has when it there are actually two different armor types installed.

-     * @return True when the patchwork checkbox is selected; this is not equivalent to the unit having patchwork
-     * armor (entity.hasPatchworkArmor()); it only has when it there are actually two different armor types installed.
+     * @return {@code true} if the patchwork checkbox is selected. This indicates only the current UI selection and
+     *         may differ from whether the unit actually has patchwork armor
+     *         ({@code entity.hasPatchworkArmor()}). The unit is considered to have patchwork armor only when
+     *         multiple different armor types are installed.

-        txtUnallocated.setEditable(false);
+        txtUnallocated.setEditable(false);
+        txtAllocated.setEditable(false);
+        txtTotal.setEditable(false);
+        txtMaxPossible.setEditable(false);
+        txtWasted.setEditable(false);
+        txtPointsPerTon.setEditable(false);

Conversation

SJuliez commented Mar 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

2 participants

SJuliez commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading

SJuliez Mar 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading