Skip to content

Conversation

@jbms
Copy link
Contributor

@jbms jbms commented Feb 2, 2023

Fixes #192, fixes #177

@jbms jbms requested a review from jstriebel February 2, 2023 05:27
rabernat
rabernat previously approved these changes Feb 2, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@rabernat rabernat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have reviewed this and think it looks all good.

Thanks for taking the time to write this down Jeremey.

jstriebel
jstriebel previously approved these changes Feb 3, 2023
Copy link
Member

@jstriebel jstriebel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks @jbms! Also LGTM, just pushed a commit with minor formatting edits. I also started to clean-up the Storage – Operations section, but noticed that it's quite out of date and probably better fixed in a separate PR. (We might even consider removing it completly, I'm not quite sure how helpful it is.)

@jstriebel
Copy link
Member

@rabernat Could you approve this once again? my approval doesn't count since I commited and also my commit automatically discarded your previous one.

@jstriebel
Copy link
Member

jstriebel commented Feb 8, 2023

PS: A changelog entry is missing, could you add one @jbms? done

Copy link
Member

@joshmoore joshmoore left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Consider to remove entrypoint metadata, do not specify root v3 core spec: Consider to drop /meta prefix, have file at URI

4 participants