Merged
Conversation
Owner
|
Thanks, beautiful image haha.
Maybe so! I don't think its super critical because of how we call it but its nice. |
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Closes #71
Irrelevant for the current state of the PR (so feel free to ignore this entire PR description), but in my issue I said this:
What I had to deal with was getting the node ID (
DC_bO8RxDkUrw4=) from the comment ID present in URLs by manually constructing it. But since we already have the node ID, we can just request the entire comment URL… so yeah, I wasted like 30 minutes on making an explainer diagram for my original solution before realizing it's much simpler 🥲I don't want it to go to waste, so I'm including it here for fun. Actually -- would it be useful to allow the URL comment ID to be passed into
gh-manage-by-discussionrather than the GraphQL node ID?