Dcat issue 1526 bis annette proposal #1579
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
riccardoAlbertoni
requested review from
pchampin,
dr-shorthair,
pwin,
agbeltran,
cburle,
andrea-perego and
davebrowning
Closed
pchampin
approved these changes
Aug 3, 2023
Co-authored-by: Pierre-Antoine Champin <[email protected]>
|
@agreiner wrote:
@agreiner - Sorry...It seems I have forgot to provide the proper preview and diff. This PR aims at considering all your changes, see the links below. Though pairwise text comparison is not among my best skill and a double check is more than welcome. |
|
I think you did an excellent job! |
agreiner
approved these changes
Aug 4, 2023
davebrowning
approved these changes
Aug 4, 2023
dr-shorthair
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2023
andrea-perego
approved these changes
Aug 5, 2023
|
This Pr implements and relaborates suggestions made in issue #1526 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This implements suggestions made by @agreiner on Pr #1578.
@agreiner: A huge thank for revising Pr #1578. I like that now the section provides more explicit guidance than before, so I am inclined to accept your proposal.
@davebrowning, @pchampin, @andrea-perego (Who had accepted PR#1578 already): are you comfortable with this rephrasing? Please provide your GIT Review.