#586 made some code review fixes for failed parsing feature#1
Merged
RollingHog merged 4 commits intoRollingHog:521-notice-parcing-failurefrom Nov 18, 2022
Conversation
Author
|
Oh, I realized that I missed one feature: avoid checking "allowed_users" when requested by an admin. Will add it later |
Owner
|
Well, maybe a little. Thank you 😁 Hope my contribution was useful |
Owner
Oh wait didn't see that. Will do ASAP, maybe tomorrowor today |
Owner
|
Well now this is taking way too long. Since you're repo owner I don't see any things to correct. Merging now. @bugy |
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Hi @RollingHog, I decided to fix my code review comments myself :) I know, that I can be quite nit-picky and strict on reviews. So to make the feature live sooner and avoid annoying work for you, I decided to fix all my code review comments myself.
Could you review those, please?