Routing unified structured data#21
Merged
Viv-Rajkumar merged 13 commits intoOct 5, 2015
Merged
Conversation
added 9 commits
July 1, 2015 16:29
Contributor
Author
|
@viv should this be closed, merged to refused or accepted. The work has been implemented, but not strictly as described here during Rust-3 |
Member
|
I think this should be added as an addendum to the existing merged SD PR as it contains more detail and is helpful. If you can do that we can merge it in straight away as it does not argue or debate any features, just explains more. |
Viv-Rajkumar
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 5, 2015
…_data Routing unified structured data
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
3 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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Complements routings perspective on the RFC for Unified Structured Data (#11). This RFC is purely intended to elaborate on the practical impact for routing and allow the relelvant discussions limited to the implementation. It is explicitly not intended to discuss the design; these discussions only belong on the parent RFC