Add import validation dialog#655
Merged
Merged
Conversation
Collaborator
|
Yeah this is definitely going in the right direction. I'm a little afraid of the complexity that might be added with the other import issues/tasks in our backlog but this is great. Going to apologize for this brain dump of questions/comments:
|
0bec6d6 to
1114e3b
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
Ready for review. Your comments were good, I made all those changes. |
BryonLewis
requested changes
Mar 22, 2021
Collaborator
BryonLewis
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I really like this for the import tool. It makes a lot of sense and gives a good point for some of the other tasks.
Just some things involving edge cases and trying to improperly import data.
BryonLewis
approved these changes
Mar 22, 2021
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
@BryonLewis not ready for code review yet, but if you could give some general feedback about how this tracks against what you had in mind, that'd be appreciated. Is this going in the right direction?
fixes #606
fixes #622
Relevant to parts of #417 as well.