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

Fix inconsistency with add operator, Added switch/case, Added default pipeline, Filter block with format function #95

Closed
wants to merge 0 commits into from

Conversation

maxime1907
Copy link

@maxime1907 maxime1907 commented Jul 17, 2018

#93

@annismckenzie
Copy link
Member

I rebased all of your work on top of the current master and reworked the commits some (dropping unnecessary merges, combining fixup commits). I went through the code yesterday and understand only half of it so I'll add some tests next. I might also split out the + operator changes as I mentioned in #93.

@annismckenzie
Copy link
Member

Sorry that this takes so long but I'm not comfortable with merging this before I add at least a couple more test cases. I will do that this week.

@annismckenzie annismckenzie self-assigned this Aug 9, 2018
@ylacancellera
Copy link

Hi !
Any plan on this ? Looking forward for it !

@tooolbox
Copy link
Contributor

@annismckenzie ping! :)

@Dexus
Copy link

Dexus commented Jan 30, 2020

ping @annismckenzie <3

@annismckenzie
Copy link
Member

@tooolbox @Dexus I can do a rebase of this branch against the current master but then it'd be up to someone else to test this as I currently don't have the bandwidth to make sure this monster of a PR is good to go. The project where I used Jet extensively was replaced just a couple days ago after working on a single page application for the last 2 years… so I'm effectively not using Jet anymore in production. Any thoughts?

@annismckenzie
Copy link
Member

Sigh, made a mistake with a push. Don't really know what happened here on the upstream. I rebased everything and will open up a new PR. Sorry guys.

@tooolbox
Copy link
Contributor

tooolbox commented Feb 2, 2020

No prob @annismckenzie

Sure, don't mind doing some testing.

@annismckenzie
Copy link
Member

That's greatly appreciated! I'll try to write up some more tests for the parts that don't have any yet (default etc.). The branch in #136 is rebased against the current master with Go modules on v3. Can you take that for a spin?

@Dexus
Copy link

Dexus commented Feb 2, 2020

@annismckenzie will take it for a test in our dev.

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.

5 participants