Skip to content

Make common traits consistent with github-branch-source-plugin #256

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 16, 2019
Merged

Make common traits consistent with github-branch-source-plugin #256

merged 2 commits into from
Nov 16, 2019

Conversation

darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor

@darxriggs darxriggs commented Nov 9, 2019 •
edited
Loading

@darxriggs darxriggs mentioned this pull request Nov 9, 2019
Merged
@darxriggs darxriggs closed this Nov 9, 2019
@darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

hiccups on ci.jenkins.io

@darxriggs darxriggs reopened this Nov 9, 2019
@jetersen
Copy link
Member

@darxriggs isn't this just formatting? 🤔

@darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

darxriggs commented Nov 11, 2019 •
edited
Loading

It's mainly about a cleaned up consistent formatting but I also removed one additional instanceof check here.

@darxriggs
Consistency with github-branch-source-plugin traits - formatting
9ba1a1f
@darxriggs
Consistency with github-branch-source-plugin traits - code changes
a6bab46 
- Replace deprecated API calls.
- Don't perform an `instanceof` check in any of the `decorateContext` methods.
@darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

I now split the original change into "formatting" and "code changes".

@jetersen jetersen merged commit e5f605b into jenkinsci:master Nov 16, 2019
@darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

darxriggs commented Nov 16, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Is it by intention that only a squash commit instead of my individual commits made it to master?
I am asking because the commit comments got lost doing it this way.

@jetersen
Copy link
Member

no they are not? They are here in the pull request? 😓

@darxriggs
Copy link
Contributor Author

darxriggs commented Nov 16, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Yes they are still here (even if quite small in this case), example a6bab46. That's really a downside of GitHub that if someone is not explicitly looking for the commit messages in a pull request, they are not shown very prominently.

But when having a look at a git repository's history locally one normally would not additionally consider GitHub to look for more details.

@jetersen jetersen added the chore label Jan 28, 2020
@darxriggs darxriggs deleted the consistency branch January 28, 2020 22:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jetersen jetersen jetersen approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
chore
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@darxriggs @jetersen