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

Passive voice to the rescue #4850

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 30, 2021
Merged

Passive voice to the rescue #4850

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 30, 2021

Conversation

martinthomson
Copy link
Member

Rather than saying who ignores MAX_STREAMS, we can just that it is ignored.

Closes #4849.

@martinthomson martinthomson added editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus. -transport labels Mar 23, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@janaiyengar janaiyengar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, this is the right fix.

@martinthomson martinthomson merged commit f6dc768 into master Mar 30, 2021
@martinthomson martinthomson deleted the max_streams-wording branch March 30, 2021 22:18
martinthomson added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
-transport editorial An issue that does not affect the design of the protocol; does not require consensus.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Transport: Receiver/sender wording for MAX_STREAMS
4 participants