Add a warning about #835 #1488
Open
Add a warning about #835 #1488
+29
−1
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
Thanks.
When you want to add a reference to #835, I imagine that it is for this comment ( #835 (comment) ), right? |
|
Will do when I get to my laptop :) About the link - I did not necessarily mean the comment but rather the thread about the issue in general, but actually a good idea to link there 👍 |
|
@pmiossec done 🙂 I also added the next relevant changeset ID to the warning, updated the wording and did some other minor changes. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
I spent like half a day debugging the project as it was failing to clone my repo, just to find the issue is the branch got deleted and then recreated (#835). So I thought adding at least a warning message in such case could be helpful for others 🙂
I cannot say for sure this would not affect other cases, thus producing false-positive warnings, but in my case it shows as expected.