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

Javadoc cleanup 1203 #6746

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2019
Merged

Javadoc cleanup 1203 #6746

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 6, 2019

Conversation

ddunig2
Copy link
Contributor

@ddunig2 ddunig2 commented Dec 4, 2019

This PR is simply a backport of #6729 to the RxJava 2.x branch.

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 4, 2019

Whoa, that's definitively incorrect. Looks like you started with a very old commit. You should checkout 2.x from this repo, not your.older fork.

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 4, 2019

Okay, so it only needed retargeting. You have to select the target branch next time you create a PR for 2.x as the default is 3.x.

@akarnokd akarnokd closed this Dec 4, 2019
@akarnokd akarnokd reopened this Dec 4, 2019
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Dec 4, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #6746 into 2.x will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                2.x    #6746      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     98.24%   98.26%   +0.01%     
+ Complexity     6350     6345       -5     
============================================
  Files           677      677              
  Lines         45532    45532              
  Branches       6334     6334              
============================================
+ Hits          44733    44742       +9     
+ Misses          251      244       -7     
+ Partials        548      546       -2
Impacted Files Coverage Δ Complexity Δ
src/main/java/io/reactivex/Flowable.java 100% <ø> (ø) 567 <0> (ø) ⬇️
...operators/flowable/BlockingFlowableMostRecent.java 100% <ø> (ø) 2 <0> (ø) ⬇️
...ators/observable/BlockingObservableMostRecent.java 100% <ø> (ø) 2 <0> (ø) ⬇️
src/main/java/io/reactivex/Observable.java 100% <ø> (ø) 542 <0> (ø) ⬇️
...ava/io/reactivex/disposables/ActionDisposable.java 100% <ø> (ø) 2 <0> (ø) ⬇️
...tivex/internal/observers/FutureSingleObserver.java 88.67% <0%> (-5.67%) 23% <0%> (-1%)
...l/operators/observable/ObservableFlatMapMaybe.java 90.84% <0%> (-2.62%) 2% <0%> (ø)
...activex/internal/observers/QueueDrainObserver.java 97.43% <0%> (-2.57%) 21% <0%> (-1%)
.../internal/disposables/ListCompositeDisposable.java 98% <0%> (-2%) 34% <0%> (-1%)
...nternal/operators/observable/ObservableWindow.java 98% <0%> (-2%) 3% <0%> (ø)
... and 22 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 56d6e91...a510cc1. Read the comment docs.

@ddunig2
Copy link
Contributor Author

ddunig2 commented Dec 4, 2019

@akarnokd Yes my apologies, I did not click on the right branch. Do I have to make another PR to fix it or is it taken care of?

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 4, 2019

No need for a new PR, I could change the target to 2.x and it is now okay.

@ddunig2
Copy link
Contributor Author

ddunig2 commented Dec 4, 2019

@akarnokd Can you rephrase that for me, please?

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 4, 2019

No need for a new PR, I could change the target to 2.x and it is now okay.

@ddunig2
Copy link
Contributor Author

ddunig2 commented Dec 4, 2019

@akarnokd Okay great, nothing else left for me to do on this particular issue?

@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 4, 2019

I don't think so, unless one of our regular reviewers finds something I overlooked.

@ddunig2
Copy link
Contributor Author

ddunig2 commented Dec 5, 2019

@akarnokd ok great. What else can I help with?

@akarnokd akarnokd merged commit 31b407f into ReactiveX:2.x Dec 6, 2019
@akarnokd
Copy link
Member

akarnokd commented Dec 6, 2019

Can't think of anything else right now.

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants