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

fix: isCachingEnabled checks incorrect options object #58

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 4, 2023

Conversation

tbazelczuk
Copy link
Contributor

@tbazelczuk tbazelczuk commented Dec 4, 2023

How did you implement it:

isCachingEnabled access proper options object

How can we verify it:

request enableCaching option set to false now disables caching

Todos:

  • Write documentation (if required)
  • Fix linting errors
  • Enable "Allow edits from maintainers" for this PR
  • Update the messages below

Is this ready for review?: YES
Is it a breaking change?: NO

@tbazelczuk tbazelczuk requested a review from a team as a code owner December 4, 2023 15:56
@tbazelczuk tbazelczuk requested review from Borsuczio, shirishapitta and bchelkowski and removed request for a team December 4, 2023 15:56
@bchelkowski bchelkowski changed the title fix: rename enableCaching options fix: isCachingEnabled checks incorrect options object Dec 4, 2023
@bchelkowski bchelkowski merged commit dd109bb into master Dec 4, 2023
1 check passed
@bchelkowski bchelkowski deleted the fix-enableCaching-options branch December 4, 2023 17:39
github-actions bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 4, 2023
## [2.1.4](v2.1.3...v2.1.4) (2023-12-04)

### Bug Fixes

* isCachingEnabled checks incorrect options object ([#58](#58)) ([dd109bb](dd109bb))
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Dec 4, 2023

🎉 This PR is included in version 2.1.4 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants