Flow: Bugfixes for link style #1132
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
klemmchr
changed the title
knsv
approved these changes
Dec 11, 2019
|
Neat! Good job! It is nice to see flowcharts getting some attention. On to you question: Having the different PRs is preferred as it makes it easier to keep track what issues goes where and what issues are fixed. That can be surprisingly difficult ... :) Apart from that, I will include the rendering tests together with the one from the other PR. |
I see what you mean :) I'll do seperate PRs then. Thanks for adding the cypress integration tests, next time I'll take care of it by myself. |
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Resolves #910 set correct position and style for edge labels when using linkStyle
Resolves #1088 handle multiline texts in edge labels when using linkStyle
I did both issues in one commit as they were found in exactly the same code blocks. I hope that's ok for that case, otherwise I'll certainly go for separate PRs next time.