Skip to content

fix(detectors): Better wording for single check fail / recovery #101229

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
+2 −2
Open

fix(detectors): Better wording for single check fail / recovery #101229

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions static/app/views/detectors/components/details/uptime/index.tsx
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -60,14 +60,14 @@ export function UptimeDetectorDetails({detector, project}: UptimeDetectorDetails
<DetailLayout.Sidebar>
<Section title={t('Detect')}>
{tn(
'%s consecutive failed check.',
'%s failed check.',
'%s consecutive failed checks.',
detector.config.downtimeThreshold
)}
</Section>
<Section title={t('Resolve')}>
{tn(
'%s consecutive successful check.',
'%s successful check.',
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Bug: Inconsistent Pluralization in Check Messages

The pluralization for "failed check" and "successful check" messages is inconsistent. Singular forms now omit "consecutive" while plural forms retain it, leading to confusing messaging about check thresholds.

Fix in Cursor Fix in Web

'%s consecutive successful checks.',
detector.config.recoveryThreshold
)}
Expand Down
Loading