Skip to content

Conversation

RasmusWL
Copy link
Member

@RasmusWL RasmusWL commented Feb 3, 2021

No description provided.

Copy link
Contributor

@tausbn tausbn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think this looks good, apart from a minor comment about a comment.

This will conflict with #5103, however, and as that PR already has a complicated commit history, I would like to avoid having to attempt to merge this PR into it.

Rather, I think an easier approach would be to simply recreate this PR using API graphs once the other PR has gone in (i.e. creating a new PR, cherry-picking the tests and change note, and redoing the implementation, which really shouldn't take long).

I'll be happy to do this. Certainly happier than I would be fixing merge conflicts.

@RasmusWL
Copy link
Member Author

I've already merged the API graphs PR, and have just fixed up this PR... Since I just spotted your review, I have also tried to reword that comment a bit. If it's still unclear, I'm happy to accept a suggestion making it better 👍

@RasmusWL RasmusWL requested a review from tausbn February 16, 2021 14:31
Copy link
Contributor

@tausbn tausbn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Perfect! (And so succinct! 😍)

@tausbn tausbn merged commit 9499edf into github:main Feb 16, 2021
@RasmusWL RasmusWL deleted the flask-blueprints branch February 17, 2021 10:09
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