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

chore(quitDriver): have quitDriver return a webdriver promise directly #3992

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jan 20, 2017

Conversation

sjelin
Copy link
Contributor

@sjelin sjelin commented Jan 20, 2017

Wrapping it in a q promise is blocking #3899

Closes #3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine. It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.

Wrapping it in a `q` promise is blocking angular#3899

Closes angular#3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine.  It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.
@juliemr
Copy link
Member

juliemr commented Jan 20, 2017

LGTM once Travis is happy.

@sjelin sjelin merged commit 132fb86 into angular:noCF Jan 20, 2017
sjelin added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 23, 2017
#3992)

Wrapping it in a `q` promise is blocking #3899

Closes #3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine.  It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.
@sjelin sjelin added this to Stage 0: Preparation in Support ControlFlow-less Selenium Jan 25, 2017
@sjelin sjelin moved this from Stage 0: Prep (issues) to Stage 0: Prep (PRs) in Support ControlFlow-less Selenium Jan 25, 2017
sjelin added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 26, 2017
#3992)

Wrapping it in a `q` promise is blocking #3899

Closes #3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine.  It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.
sjelin added a commit to sjelin/protractor that referenced this pull request Jan 27, 2017
angular#3992)

Wrapping it in a `q` promise is blocking angular#3899

Closes angular#3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine.  It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.
igniteram pushed a commit to igniteram/protractor that referenced this pull request Feb 21, 2017
angular#3992)

Wrapping it in a `q` promise is blocking angular#3899

Closes angular#3902

Custom frameworks might not make this change but it'll be fine.  It'll only be a
problem in edge cases and they probably weren't returning the right promise
before anyway.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants