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
goresym 2.6.3 (new formula) #155716
goresym 2.6.3 (new formula) #155716
Conversation
adf2cf6
to
d5cf82b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM, just one nit comment
@chenrui333 Accepted your changes :) |
@Oxyriser can you squash all the commits? Thanks! |
Co-Authored-By: Rui Chen <rui@chenrui.dev>
cf0002a
to
36fdf35
Compare
@chenrui333 I've squashed the commits and force pushed.. but honestly that really shouldn't be a blocker in the automation on this repo. PR's can be squash merged, which would solve this and other 'friction points' (like the CI blocking a PR because a certain commit within it is named poorly) without requiring manual process on each and every PR. Edit: Raised this concern in the following: |
@0xdevalias thanks for your contribution! 🎉 |
HOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>
, where<formula>
is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew test <formula>
, where<formula>
is the name of the formula you're submitting?brew audit --strict <formula>
(after doingHOMEBREW_NO_INSTALL_FROM_API=1 brew install --build-from-source <formula>
)? If this is a new formula, does it passbrew audit --new <formula>
?Add new formula for
GoReSym
CLI: