Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

inconsistant requirements documentation #74

Closed
slawr opened this issue Jun 24, 2021 · 5 comments
Closed

inconsistant requirements documentation #74

slawr opened this issue Jun 24, 2021 · 5 comments

Comments

@slawr
Copy link

slawr commented Jun 24, 2021

Hi,

I noticed some inconsistencies in the documentation on requirements. README.md: section 1 lists python 3.7, section 2.1 3.8.5. I started to write a PR to fix it but realised I am not in a position to say which it should be so raised this issue instead.

[update: crossing out as now addressed] I also notice that the VSS Tools section of the online VSS documentation has a Requirements sub-section that does not seem to match the README.md but perhaps there is a different intention in that section.

Regards

Steve

@slawr
Copy link
Author

slawr commented Jan 10, 2022

Reviewed the original issue with the feeling that the points may now be addressed due to the code changes. However I notice that the inconsistency with python versions remain.

The second point about the online VSS doc appears to have been addressed by the removal of the requirements sub-section. Crossing through that comment.

@SebastianSchildt
Copy link
Collaborator

Might be adressed by #131

@danielwilms
Copy link
Contributor

@erikbosch would you close this one please. Is indeed fixed as @SebastianSchildt suggested by #131

@slawr
Copy link
Author

slawr commented Jan 11, 2022

@danielwilms It's fine you asked erik and that he closes it - I agree with Sebastian the remaining issue is addressed by #131 - but just from the perspective of understanding how the project is set up is there a reason for preferring he does it? Like you label it somehow as opposed to me just closing it.

@erikbosch
Copy link
Collaborator

@slawr @danielwilms - I do not think it matters who close it. The issuer can always close it. Me and Magnus Feuer have been added as "outside collaborators admins" for vss-tools and can also close issues, then I assume all "COVESA github admins" (Gunnar and some more?) can close it as well.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants