This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 29, 2026. It is now read-only.
Merged
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
Seems this change is timely, given a comment from @ScottDowne yesterday:
|
ScottDowne
approved these changes
Oct 17, 2023
Contributor
ScottDowne
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me. Do we want to make sure chutten has had a chance to respond before merging?
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 subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Goal
Be more consistent with naming between Glean and the API.
I'd love feedback/perspectives on:
Is this naming better? The plan is to also apply the renaming to the MoSo content feed API.
Deployment steps
References
JIRA ticket:
Glean Bugzilla bug:
Slack thread where naming was discussed:
Firefox change: