Skip to content

Fix bug in prioritystatus#338

Merged
SpamapS merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
fix-priority-status
Jun 2, 2022
Merged

Fix bug in prioritystatus#338
SpamapS merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
fix-priority-status

Conversation

@SpamapS
Copy link
Member

@SpamapS SpamapS commented Jun 1, 2022

This has never been correct, and has only ever shown 1 if there are any
in a priority, or 0 if there are not. That is because the next
struct field that as used is confusingly not maintained in this context.

Closes #337

This has never been correct, and has only ever shown 1 if there are any
in a priority, or 0 if there are not. That is because the next
struct field that as used is confusingly not maintained in this context.

Closes #337
@SpamapS SpamapS requested a review from esabol June 1, 2022 03:26
@esabol
Copy link
Member

esabol commented Jun 1, 2022

Thanks, @SpamapS ! Looks good. Simple enough fix. Do you have time to add a test for this? If not, I'm cool with just merging it.

P.S. Can you remove Travis CI from the required checks? It's just impeding things at this point.

@SpamapS
Copy link
Member Author

SpamapS commented Jun 1, 2022 via email

@SpamapS SpamapS merged commit 3542a15 into master Jun 2, 2022
@esabol esabol deleted the fix-priority-status branch November 19, 2022 20:28
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.

gearadmin --priority-status does not return expected values

2 participants