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

Support additional_emails field on the Customer type #31

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 17, 2024

Conversation

sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor

@sjmiller609 sjmiller609 commented Jan 12, 2024

Support additional_emails on the Customer type

Orb reference docs

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jan 12, 2024

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@sjmiller609 sjmiller609 marked this pull request as ready for review January 12, 2024 16:35
@sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor Author

@benesch Thank you for the library and accepting PRs, let me know anything else! I didn't actually run the tests because of the emails and Orb key, but if they pass it should be good. Please let me know anything else!

@sjmiller609 sjmiller609 changed the title Add additional emails Support additional_emails field on the Customer type Jan 12, 2024
@benesch
Copy link
Member

benesch commented Jan 12, 2024

Thanks for the PR! I triggered a CI run. @arusahni could you handle the review here?

@benesch benesch requested a review from arusahni January 12, 2024 17:05
@sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor Author

sjmiller609 commented Jan 12, 2024

The test failure is related to GHA not sharing tokens across forks. I can switch to a branch if you grant me writer to the repo, that would dodge the issue, or maybe there's another way? cc @arusahni

@sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closes #30

@arusahni
Copy link
Contributor

Ah, yeah, that's annoying. I can pull this down and run the Linux tests locally, and we can do code review on this PR. Once it looks good to merge I'll open a branched PR with your commits (preserving your authorship) and we can get the final CI run and merge this in. Does that sound okay to you?

@sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor Author

Ah, yeah, that's annoying. I can pull this down and run the Linux tests locally, and we can do code review on this PR. Once it looks good to merge I'll open a branched PR with your commits (preserving your authorship) and we can get the final CI run and merge this in. Does that sound okay to you?

Sounds good! Just let me know if you change you mind, I can follow another process to make it easier for you if I have another change request later.

@arusahni
Copy link
Contributor

No worries at all! We very much appreciate your contributions :-)

I'll try to get to this within the next day or so.

Copy link
Contributor

@arusahni arusahni left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks good! I can verify that, with the typo fix I suggested, the tests pass. Let's get a few updates made and then we can close it for me to resubmit via a branch:

  1. Revert the Cargo.toml version bump.
  2. Apply the email address fix suggestion.
  3. Add an entry to CHANGELOG.md for this. Since we're using Cargo release, we use this convention for recording updates. Spefically, place the entry under the "Unreleased" header. It will automatically be associated with the new version when we cut the release.
  4. Let's squash the commits into a single one with a semantic commit message.

Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/api.rs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Cargo.toml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@sjmiller609 sjmiller609 force-pushed the main branch 3 times, most recently from 482fd3e to 68d9003 Compare January 17, 2024 14:37
@sjmiller609
Copy link
Contributor Author

@arusahni ok done

@arusahni arusahni merged commit 4384468 into MaterializeInc:main Jan 17, 2024
8 of 10 checks passed
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.

4 participants