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

react_component_hash always has pre-render true #1077

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 1, 2018

Conversation

justin808
Copy link
Member

@justin808 justin808 commented Apr 30, 2018

  • Makes no sense to have react_component_hash not use prerrender.
  • Fixed issue where checking gem existence.
  • Added docs for react_component_hash

This change is Reviewable

@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Apr 30, 2018

Coverage Status

Coverage remained the same at ?% when pulling eeddbdb on react-component-hash-automatic-prerender into 47f0a20 on master.

justin808 added 2 commits May 1, 2018 09:34
* Makes no sense to have react_component_hash not use prerrender.
* Fixed issue where checking gem existence.
* Added docs for react_component_hash
@justin808 justin808 force-pushed the react-component-hash-automatic-prerender branch from 75ae868 to eeddbdb Compare May 1, 2018 19:43
@justin808 justin808 merged commit 0ab2848 into master May 1, 2018
@justin808 justin808 deleted the react-component-hash-automatic-prerender branch May 1, 2018 19:45
@mapreal19
Copy link
Member

:lgtm:


Reviewed 5 of 5 files at r1, 1 of 1 files at r2.
Review status: all files reviewed at latest revision, all discussions resolved, some commit checks broke.


Comments from Reviewable

justin808 added a commit that referenced this pull request May 4, 2018
* react_component_hash always has pre-render true.
* Makes no sense to have react_component_hash not use prerrender.
* Fixed issue where checking gem existence.
* Added docs for react_component_hash
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.

3 participants