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.

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

[Fix] order: restore default behaviour unless type is in groups #2087

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 20, 2021
Merged

[Fix] order: restore default behaviour unless type is in groups #2087

merged 1 commit into from
May 20, 2021

Conversation

geraintwhite
Copy link
Contributor

#2070 and #2084

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented May 17, 2021 •
edited
Loading

Coverage Status

Coverage increased (+0.9%) to 82.448% when pulling b39770d on grit96:import-type-option into 72b9c3d on benmosher:master.

@olee olee mentioned this pull request May 17, 2021
Closed
@geraintwhite geraintwhite marked this pull request as ready for review May 19, 2021 20:41
ljharb
ljharb approved these changes May 19, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ljharb ljharb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you confirm that all changed tests were ones you added in your original PR?

tests/src/rules/order.js Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/src/rules/order.js Show resolved Hide resolved
tests/src/rules/order.js Show resolved Hide resolved
@geraintwhite
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ljharb yes, I reverted the test changes from the previous commit and added new ones for the type group

@ljharb ljharb merged commit b39770d into import-js:master May 20, 2021
@MichaelDeBoey MichaelDeBoey mentioned this pull request May 21, 2021
Merged
@typeofweb
Copy link

Could you, please, stop introducing breaking changes in patch releases? Thank you :P

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented May 27, 2021

@mmiszy the word you’re looking for is “bugs”. Feel free to request a refund though.

@typeofweb
Copy link

@ljharb there's no need to be sarcastic and condescending.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented May 27, 2021

@mmiszy yes, i agree that your initial comment was both rude and unnecessary.

@typeofweb
Copy link

@ljharb I'm sorry that you feel that way about my feedback.

@ljharb
Copy link
Member

ljharb commented May 27, 2021

@mmiszy it's not feedback. nobody intentionally introduces breaking changes in a patch release - it's a bug that it's happened. Bugs are unavoidable, and can never be fully stopped, so asking for that can't possibly ever achieve anything except to make someone feel bad that they introduced a bug (which in this case, wasn't even me).

Please stop pretending like your comment was made in good faith. It was clearly snark born out of frustration, and that should be kept to oneself.

@typeofweb
Copy link

@ljharb I'm sorry you see it this way 😥

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@ljharb ljharb ljharb approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@geraintwhite @coveralls @typeofweb @ljharb