Open ghost opened 7 years ago
The bulk patches that address this issue took a rather unconventional route into being submitted upstream. They were integrated into branch "upstream-next", and reviewed while in that branch. Once these patches reach their final form, I'll link them in this issue. The original patches are kept in branch githubissue-132-upstream-next-TurningWrenches (i.e. these patches don't contain the feedback from the reviews that occurred).
A patch or two got left behind its friends. Those patches will be a part of a new branch; the integration of the aforementioned patches causes merge conflicts in my old local copy, and at this point its more effective from both a functional and organizational perspective to just make a new branch: githubissue-132-upstream-next-TurningWrenches_PART_II.
Is that branch ready for me to pull yet? Or are you still working on it?
Branch: githubissue-132-upstream-next-TurningWrenches Commit(s): 0b2395c7b9747f3378ac0e386b196ab29e3d441a - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 8bfaadae2d1c0b40f6bc7b4f8f6a9b63af477809 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED e83af743db56964a6087082c8d0e7f118ce4d042 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 119d254a4dbd5b7a881f09d76d42d0e878c626d7 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 4f9e06fa755d0abfa35a6f7d44e46f5671e1f250 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 2217fbb7d3f96269ac08c53180d5aedb86937352 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED dc272895de660791fead161f143d4203d9fbf3f7 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 9e39ecb2d9745baa4c053ff5c435eb19ff9bdc58 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED d1a0ec501789f57ef9cb73d0bcacd33c110ba511 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 4d460b609f8289bc4b8d3e85588e55eead2ac4e5 - OUTSIDE COMMIT c654155cf22962c0ec0cbd9a71775eafdedf8273 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 3ed24a729342348628b6e74636f38cc4942beaf8 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 6c1abadcbac761d7018578322aa76b7aac9298a1 - OUTSIDE COMMIT 65f4ad2d4d3aefc1fe1dfe756a9bf922fa23158b - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED 79901a25abda57f240a8f096819342720fcb0839 - SUBMITTED + ACCEPTED T710-1 verified (smoke-test): Yes
Branch: githubissue-132pt2-upstream-next-TurningWrenches Commit(s): 1a952c74e736292cb960b978e9ae429bcf5af64d fc9a92c47f86454dd75829e527aadda5937c4cf6 T710-1 verified (smoke-test): Yes
This task incurred a bit of scope-creep, but it was well worth the effort (code readability + consistency is up). With respect to the original feedback, I'm not sure what the first comment is referring to in the top code-snippet. For the second comment, that referenced code (comment) seems to have been deleted anyway. Thoughts @davidker?
I thought the first comment was referring to the blank line after req and before the if. I think we had too many blank lines just randomly spaced throughout our code. I've put both patches into upstream-testing.
No blank line needed
Blank line in the comment?