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

Fixed TransitionalOptions typings #4147

Merged

Conversation

DigitalBrainJS
Copy link
Collaborator

@DigitalBrainJS DigitalBrainJS commented Oct 6, 2021

Just fixed the type definition for the TransitionalOptions interface to mark its properties as optional.

Adding: Refs #3688

@jasonsaayman jasonsaayman changed the base branch from release/v0.22.0 to master October 6, 2021 18:05
@caugner
Copy link
Contributor

caugner commented Oct 6, 2021

Could you please interactively rebase on master and remove the other commits that came as a side-effect of the changed base branch?

Alternatively, you could reset --hard your branch to master and cherry-pick your commit (44f3b9f).

@DigitalBrainJS DigitalBrainJS force-pushed the fix/transitional-options-typings branch from 44f3b9f to 023ee8f Compare October 6, 2021 20:11
@DigitalBrainJS DigitalBrainJS force-pushed the fix/transitional-options-typings branch from 023ee8f to e5f5800 Compare October 6, 2021 20:38
Copy link
Contributor

@caugner caugner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, but could you explain shortly why these properties are optional, e.g. referencing the corresponding code locations or giving an example?

@remcohaszing remcohaszing mentioned this pull request Oct 7, 2021
@DigitalBrainJS
Copy link
Collaborator Author

DigitalBrainJS commented Oct 7, 2021

@caugner That was my PR(#3688) so they are definitely optional, but recently noticed that for some reason I forgot to reflect this in d.ts

@caugner
Copy link
Contributor

caugner commented Oct 7, 2021

@caugner That was my PR(#3688) so they are definitely optional, but recently noticed that for some reason I forgot to reflect this in d.ts

Thanks for the clarification. I would suggest adding Refs #3688 to the PR description to add context to the commit.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants